🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the review board concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the board held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this case to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these principles."

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

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.