🔗 Share this article

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

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order platforms to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the review board concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content 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 could have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this case to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.