🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the regulator to instruct 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. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible 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 more detailed depiction with different editing could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public long after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this case to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their own content policies.