🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that prevented Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video 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 met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the decision.

"X fought this case to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

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