🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia 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.

Details of the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted 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 focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance 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 ultimately agreed 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 more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this case to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. We remain committed to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator 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 high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

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