🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

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 recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority 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. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel disagreed, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the decision.

"X fought this case to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued take-down orders 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 images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.