🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to assess and rate the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to 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—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". The platform even compared the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

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 gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. We remain committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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