🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel disagreed, contending the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, X welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this case to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.