🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage 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 prompted extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was released long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"X fought this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. We remain committed to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

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