🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended 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, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes 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 long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, X welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this decision to uphold free speech and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps 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 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.

Instead, the companies have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their own content policies.