🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Ban

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

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the event, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of public access 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 "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across 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 instructed to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their own content policies.