🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original 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. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X 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 prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content 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 panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel disagreed, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public long after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders 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 upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.