🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the regulator to order social media companies to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"We challenged this case to defend free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.