🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator applied to the review board to officially classify the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members 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 warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this decision to defend free speech and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain committed to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.