🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the review board to officially classify the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Broader Context 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 circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their own content policies.