🔗 Share this article

Following 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 influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this decision to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these principles."

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

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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