🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that prevented Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous 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 could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel disagreed, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"X fought this decision to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been advised to use warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.