🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—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 asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel disagreed, arguing 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 that footage was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"We challenged this case to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain committed to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

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

Instead, platforms have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.