🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to instruct platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality 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, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was released long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to 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 importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.