🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order platforms to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was released years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this case to defend free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.