🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that prevented Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator applied to the review board to officially classify the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, 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 victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage 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 widespread discussion". X even compared the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"X fought this decision to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on 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 advised to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in line with their own content policies.