🔗 Share this article

Following a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order social media companies to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision 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 train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, 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". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. As a result, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this case to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to ensure 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 graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to apply warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their own content policies.