🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content 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 alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel disagreed, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the decision.

"X fought this decision to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their own content policies.