🔗 Share this article

In 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.

Details of the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content 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 met that threshold. As a result, the panel revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel disagreed, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X 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 safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.