🔗 Share this article

Following a significant 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. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the review board to officially classify the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

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.

X argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.