🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that prevented Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", 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 challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "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. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that generated widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this case to uphold free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their own content policies.