🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban 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

Arguing its case, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". X even compared the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members 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 justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public long after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

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

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

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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