🔗 Share this article

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

Details of the Original Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual 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 historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board 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. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

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

"X fought this case to defend free speech and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner 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 distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.