🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

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 train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted 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 victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X even compared the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel concluded 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 longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released long after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this case to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users 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. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

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