🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled 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.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested 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+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this case to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their own content policies.