🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "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 focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

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 longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

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

"X fought this case to defend freedom of expression and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, 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.