🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the commissioner to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that generated widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film 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 exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

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

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.