🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that generated widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board 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. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was released years after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the decision.

"We challenged 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 implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator 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 content were upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in line with their own content policies.