🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the classification board to officially classify the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the footage 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 exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"X fought this case to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.