🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and 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. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order platforms to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their own content policies.