🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It 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 challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of 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 excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X even compared the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content 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. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.