🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

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

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

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 camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous 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 alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board revised the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel disagreed, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public years after the event, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

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".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, 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 required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to apply warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.