🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

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 exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator has not issued 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 content were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their own content policies.