🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Ban

After 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 "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

X argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous 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 longer or clearer version with different editing could have met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing 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 invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this case to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices 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 had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

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