eSafety Regulator: Social Media Platforms Monetize Gore and Fringe Content
Social media platforms monetise gore and fringe – Australia’s eSafety regulator has raised concerns about how social media platforms prioritize the monetization of gore and fringe content, revealing their role in amplifying harmful material. During the royal commission’s investigation into antisemitism and social cohesion, Julie Inman Grant, the eSafety commissioner, criticized platforms for using algorithms and financial incentives to sustain extreme content, including footage of recent terror attacks. She argued that the profit-driven model allows these platforms to overlook the damaging impact on vulnerable communities, such as the Australian Jewish population, while maintaining a stance of resistance against regulation.
Monetizing Violence and Niche Content
Inman Grant emphasized the struggle between regulators and social media giants to control content that incites violence or spreads prejudice. She pointed out that platforms like X, now under Elon Musk’s leadership, often defend their ability to host extreme material, even when it includes graphic footage of attacks. For example, the Bondi terror attack video was contested by X, with the platform arguing its content was comparable to a horror movie. However, the commissioner stressed that such material’s influence on victims’ families and communities is far more profound.
“The cumulative effect of these videos is not just about shock value; it’s about the deliberate strategy to sustain and amplify harmful narratives,” Inman Grant said.
Her comments highlight the tension between free speech and accountability. While platforms justify their actions by citing user-generated content, the eSafety regulator notes that their financial power enables them to resist oversight. This has led to a situation where the monetization of gore is prioritized over the removal of content that perpetuates antisemitism or hate speech, creating a gap in the regulatory framework that needs urgent attention.
Strategies to Combat Online Harm
Inman Grant proposed that the current approach to content moderation is inadequate, with platforms targeting users through “deadly precision” to maximize engagement and profits. She cited the example of a 14-year-old girl who received death and rape threats after declining a date, showcasing how online harassment can escalate rapidly. The eSafety commissioner’s office intervened, contacting the school and issuing a notice requiring content creators to prove their videos were removed. However, she noted that such measures are not enough to counteract the broader issue of algorithmic amplification of hate.
“Platforms are playing a game of whack-a-mole, addressing issues as they arise but failing to tackle the root causes,” Inman Grant explained. This strategy, she argued, allows them to profit from gore while downplaying their responsibility for the emotional and social consequences of the content they host. The regulator stressed the need for stronger accountability mechanisms to ensure that harmful material is not left unchecked in the name of free expression.
Meanwhile, law enforcement agencies have expressed frustration with the delays in coordinating responses to online threats. In a case involving the Christchurch massacre, the eSafety regulator had to work closely with police to trace and remove incitement content. The commissioner believes that simultaneous action by both eSafety and real-time response units, like the National Situation Room, would improve efficiency in addressing immediate dangers, particularly during live events.
Regulatory Challenges and Community Impact
The eSafety regulator’s mandate includes cyberbullying, adult cyber-abuse, and image-based abuse, but it does not explicitly address antisemitism or hate speech. This oversight has created challenges in tackling the cumulative impact of online prejudice, especially on marginalized groups. Inman Grant stressed that while the current system has tools to handle complaints, the lack of clarity in addressing antisemitism means harmful content can persist without sufficient scrutiny.
She also highlighted the need for platforms to invest more in trust and safety initiatives, rather
