🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia 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 directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the circulating video. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending 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 parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

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