🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the regulator to order social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, 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 drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some 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 parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain committed to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to use warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.