🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented 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. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, 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 footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this decision to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders 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 had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in line with their own content policies.