🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the regulator to instruct platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was released long after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"X fought this decision to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated 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 use warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.