🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to officially classify the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

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

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. 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 excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board 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. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner 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

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in line with their own content policies.