🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case 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 footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the historic film 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 gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the panel disagreed, contending the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their own content policies.