🔗 Share this article

Following 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 influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the commissioner to order platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing 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 asserted that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the panel disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this case to uphold free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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