🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, 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. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban 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 asserted 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 focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"We challenged this case to defend freedom of expression and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

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