🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that prevented Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted 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 victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the decision.

"X fought this decision to defend free speech and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.