🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to 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

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video 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". X drew a parallel between 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 gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with different editing could have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, contending the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this decision to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to apply warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.