🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board 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 more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the decision.

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

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue formal notices to social media companies 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 "refused classification" rating.

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