🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of 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 assess and rate the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the regulator to order social media companies to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

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 footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board 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 warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel 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 flawed, as the Kennedy video 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 expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.