🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, 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 directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended 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 individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

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 different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was released years after the event, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"We challenged this case to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out 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 did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.