🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the commissioner to order platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. 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 maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board concluded 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 more detailed depiction with different editing could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.