🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated 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

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on 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 footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

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. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the board held a contrary view, contending the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

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

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident 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 advised to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.