🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. Consequently, the panel revised the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this case to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.