🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the review board concluded 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. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the board disagreed, arguing the post 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 parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

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

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.