🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented 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 individual to the bystanders.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that generated widespread discussion". The platform even compared the footage 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 content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel disagreed, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this case to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.