🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel 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 directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording 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. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, X welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.