🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "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 individual to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board revised the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

Some on the board disagreed, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"X fought this case to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed 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".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.