🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the regulator to instruct social media companies to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording 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 warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the board changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this case to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.