🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting 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 "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim 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 generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content 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. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel disagreed, contending the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

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

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

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.