🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order platforms to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video 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 different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed 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 ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in line with their own content policies.