🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case 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 victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board 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. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this decision to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

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 ensure R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their own content policies.