🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to officially classify the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the regulator to instruct platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief 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 excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event 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.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the board held a contrary view, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" 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.