🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It 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 videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was made public years after the event, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this case to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible 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 recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.