🔗 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 conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order sought by 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 review board to officially classify the circulating video. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". The platform even compared the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video 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 alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.