Elon Musk's X Wins Legal Challenge to Allow Viewing for Australians to Controversial Shooting Footage

In a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, 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.

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 warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, arguing 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 parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the ruling.

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

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

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