🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the regulator to instruct platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video 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 generated extensive public discourse". The platform 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 content 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 could have met that threshold. As a result, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"X fought this case to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.