🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content 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 online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator 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 commissioner to order social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members 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 warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel revised the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to protecting 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 prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

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 Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.