🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to officially classify the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

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 attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question 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 surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public years after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to uphold free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to use warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.