🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing 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 directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting 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

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel disagreed, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

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

"We challenged this decision to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

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