🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that prevented Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel 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 parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this decision to uphold freedom of expression 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 noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in line with their own content policies.