🔗 Share this article

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

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation 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 two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "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 focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video 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 different editing could have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the decision.

"X fought this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.