🔗 Share this article

In a significant 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 conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It initially ruled 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 filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also 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 no visible weapon. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous 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 longer or clearer version with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the panel disagreed, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this case to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain committed to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been advised to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their own content policies.