🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested 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".

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 individual to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage 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 extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board 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 justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, contending the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was made public years 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 case to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their own content policies.