🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to officially classify the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". The platform even compared the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this case to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.