🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the circulating video. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

X argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board concluded 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. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the board changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

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

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

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations 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 social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been advised to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their own content policies.