🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the regulator to instruct social media companies to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board concluded 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 alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. 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 personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as that footage was made public years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this case to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

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