🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator petitioned the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the assault of 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 no visible weapon. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing 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 flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the decision.

"X fought this case to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.