🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the regulator applied to the review board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

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 exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel disagreed, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (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 event, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the ruling.

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

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to use warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their own content policies.