🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, the Australian classification review board has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator to instruct social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was made public long after the assassination, "after public sentiment around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, X welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this case to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they did not reach the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

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