🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". X even compared the footage and the well-known recording 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. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board revised the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public years after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"X fought this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in line with their own content policies.