🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of 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 assess and rate the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted 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 victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel concluded 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 more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board held a contrary view, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented 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 instructed to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.