🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia 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 order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

X argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X even compared the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous 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 longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this case to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.