🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the review board 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 could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority 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 Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their own content policies.