🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

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 exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the board held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was released long after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to uphold free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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