🔗 Share this article

In a notable 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 conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the classification board to officially classify the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

X argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event 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 ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous 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 alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released long after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident 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.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.