🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "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. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". 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 video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing could have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel disagreed, contending the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued 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

Posting on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this case to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain committed to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their own content policies.