🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board 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)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was released long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the ruling.

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

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.