🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the review board concluded 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 alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.