🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to officially classify the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company 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 attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, 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 individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that 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 footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous 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 could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this case to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.