🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by 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 assess and rate the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

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.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board 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 alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

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

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

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent 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 disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.