The Platform X Wins Appeal to Restore Viewing for Australians to Controversial Shooting Footage

In a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order platforms to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate 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 classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

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

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"X fought this decision to uphold free speech and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, 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 Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices 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 had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

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