🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has reversed a prior decision that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". 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 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 could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the board disagreed, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was made public long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this case to uphold free speech and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain committed to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

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

Instead, platforms have been advised to apply warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.