🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to officially classify the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted 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 factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that generated widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel 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 could have met that threshold. Consequently, the board revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel disagreed, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

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 dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.