🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator petitioned the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

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

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

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 camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". X even compared the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the decision.

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

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been advised to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.