🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the regulator to instruct social media companies to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

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

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, 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". The platform drew a parallel between the footage 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 different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public long after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"X fought this decision to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

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

Recent Developments on Violent Content

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 images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.