🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible 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 might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the board disagreed, contending the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". 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 calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this case to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.