🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order platforms to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended 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 victim to the bystanders.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released long after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this case to uphold free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.