🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video 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 victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible 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 more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending 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 parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this decision to defend free speech and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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