🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to instruct social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that generated widespread discussion". X even compared the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video 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 videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel disagreed, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this case to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain committed to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their own content policies.