In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.
After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct 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. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".
In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.
X argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.
Most members of the review board concluded 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 longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.
A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".
Posting on its official policy channel, X welcomed the decision.
"X fought this case to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. We remain committed to protecting these principles."
A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed 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".
Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated 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 use sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their own content policies.
A seasoned gambling analyst with over a decade of experience in casino gaming and slot machine strategy development.
