🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the well-known recording 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. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these fundamental values."

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

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.