🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel 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 lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, 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 camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible 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 alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the panel revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.