🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board revised the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the board held a contrary view, contending the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this decision to defend free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to apply warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their own content policies.