🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was made public long after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. We remain committed to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been advised to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.