🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct platforms to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company 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 assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

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

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board concluded 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. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"X fought this case to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain 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 who are minors".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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