🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order social media companies to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released long after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this case to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. We remain committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator 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. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to apply warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.