🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video 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 argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment 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 event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this case to defend freedom of expression and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to use warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their own content policies.