🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented 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, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to officially classify the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the regulator to instruct platforms to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed 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 might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the board disagreed, contending the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the decision.

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

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

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