🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order platforms to restrict access to 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—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, 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 bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this decision to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. 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 revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.