🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question 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 individual 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 significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X even compared the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending 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 invalid, as that footage was made public years after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.