🔗 Share this article

In a significant 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 conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—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 contended that the footage in question contained only brief 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, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released years after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the ruling.

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

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

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