🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order social media companies 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—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel ultimately agreed 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. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the ruling.

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

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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