🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to instruct social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". 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 video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the ruling.

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

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.