🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. 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, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that generated widespread discussion". The platform even compared the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible 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 alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel revised the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to apply warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.