🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended 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 camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video 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. Consequently, the board revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"X fought this decision to uphold free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

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