🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to officially classify the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of 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.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video 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 video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the board changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this case to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in line with their own content policies.