🔗 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 video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to officially classify the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued 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 objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the footage and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel concluded 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 different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public years after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this case to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain committed to protecting these principles."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in line with their own content policies.