🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to officially classify the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the posts 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 comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous 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 different editing could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was released years after the event, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to apply warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their own content policies.