🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

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

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"X fought this decision to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

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 shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to apply warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their own content policies.