🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted 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 victim to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the well-known recording 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 justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the decision.

"X fought this case to defend freedom of expression and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson 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 being displayed to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

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. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.