🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"X fought this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been advised to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.