🔗 Share this article

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

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "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. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the panel disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was released long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"X fought this case to uphold free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued 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 distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their own content policies.