🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question 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 individual to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released years after the event, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the decision.

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

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.