🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct social media companies to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested 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".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this case to defend free speech and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos 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 "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.