Key Takeaways:
- The Australian classification review board has overturned a decision to block Australians from seeing footage of the shooting of conservative influencer Charlie Kirk on social media.
- Elon Musk’s X appealed against the ruling, arguing that the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive.
- The review board changed the classification of the videos to R18+, allowing them to be viewed by adults in Australia.
- The eSafety commissioner welcomed the ruling, but noted that platforms have obligations to prevent R18+ material from being displayed to Australians under 18.
- The regulator has not issued notices to platforms regarding footage from the Bondi beach terror attack, but has advised them to use sensitive content labels and interstitials.
Introduction to the Controversy
The Australian classification review board has made a significant decision regarding the availability of certain videos on social media platforms in Australia. The board overturned a ruling that would have blocked Australians from viewing footage of the shooting of conservative influencer Charlie Kirk, which occurred on September 10 at Utah Valley University. The eSafety commissioner had applied to have the video classified, which would have allowed them to serve notices on social media platforms to geo-block the posts from view for Australia-based users. However, Elon Musk’s X appealed against the ruling, arguing that the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or offensive.
The Appeal and Ruling
X appealed against the ruling on two separate Kirk videos, as well as another video that was deemed refused classification, which showed the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte, North Carolina in August. The social media company argued that the Kirk video contained brief violence, with no weapon visible, and that the footage was grainy and quickly moved away from the victim to the crowd. X compared the video to the video of the assassination of John F Kennedy, which was released 15 years after the event and is considered a historical and significant record. The majority of the review board agreed with X’s argument, stating that the video was not gratuitous, exploitative, or offensive to the extent that it should be refused classification. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with different editing or commentary might rise to the level of refused classification.
The Review Board’s Decision
The review board changed the classification of the videos to R18+, which means that they can be viewed by adults in Australia. The board’s decision was not unanimous, with a minority view disagreeing with the ruling. The minority argued that the post was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain" and that it could not be compared to the Zapruder JFK video, which was released 15 years after the assassination. The minority view argued that the emotions around the matter had subsided by the time the JFK video was released, whereas the Kirk video was still a recent and sensitive topic.
Reaction to the Ruling
X welcomed the decision, stating that they had fought the case to uphold free speech and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. The company remains committed to protecting these principles. A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the review board’s view that the video should be R18+ rated means that platforms have obligations to prevent R18+ material from being displayed to Australians under 18. The regulator has advised platforms to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on content that may be distressing or sensitive.
Implications of the Ruling
The ruling has implications for the way that social media platforms handle sensitive and disturbing content in Australia. The eSafety commissioner has not issued notices to platforms regarding footage from the Bondi beach terror attack, which has spread on social media, stating that while the images have been distressing, they have not reached the bar for refused classification. However, the regulator has advised platforms to use sensitive content labels and interstitials on this content in line with their own content policies. The ruling highlights the ongoing debate about the balance between free speech and the need to protect users from harmful or disturbing content. As social media platforms continue to evolve and play a larger role in our lives, it is likely that this debate will continue to be a major issue in the years to come.
