🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that prevented Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct social media companies to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. 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 offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X even compared the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel 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 warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this case to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in line with their own content policies.