🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms 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 similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted 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 focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the board held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, X welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this case to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices 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 content were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in line with their own content policies.