🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "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. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that generated widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members 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 alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was released long after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this case to uphold free speech and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.