🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the ruling.

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

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.