🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video 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 alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel revised the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the panel disagreed, contending the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in line with their own content policies.