🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator applied to the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel disagreed, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. We remain committed to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator did not issue formal notices 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 images were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been advised to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.