🔗 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 video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board concluded 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. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel disagreed, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.