🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain committed to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

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