🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority 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 more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. We remain committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their own content policies.