🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that generated widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel concluded 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. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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