🔗 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 conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to order social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the review board concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous 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 more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the post was "a shareable video 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 long after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this case to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to protecting these principles."

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

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue 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 distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.