🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X asserted that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have met that threshold. As a result, the panel changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel disagreed, contending the video 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 the Kennedy video was made public years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

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