🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel 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. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was released long after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

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

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

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.