🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

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 footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the board disagreed, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public long after the event, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.