🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the regulator to order social media companies to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.