🔗 Share this article

Following a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Original Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise 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 footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority 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 warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the board disagreed, 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 Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was released long after the event, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the decision.

"X fought this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner 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 images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.