🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to assess and rate 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 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—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

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 recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that generated widespread discussion". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority 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 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 board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released long after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this decision to defend free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to social media companies 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 did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their own content policies.