🔗 Share this article

Following a notable 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 influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, 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 historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members 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 warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"X fought this decision to defend free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.