🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

After the death 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. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed 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 related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, 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 even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video 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. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain committed to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.