🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel 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 lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order platforms to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, 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 bystanders.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video 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 might have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this case to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.