🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator 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. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—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 Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

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

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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