Latest news with #Elston
Yahoo
05-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Elon Musk's X and Billboard Chris celebrate 'decisive victory' against censorship in Australia
Conservative activist and children's safety campaigner "Billboard Chris" took a victory lap Wednesday after successfully suing part of the Australian government for trying to censor his posts critical of government officials that advocate for transgender operations. Following a lawsuit filed by social media platform X and the conservative activist – whose real name is Chris Elston – the Australian government was forced to back down from its demands that X delete Elston's 2024 post criticizing a World Health Organization bureaucrat for what Elston described as their pro-child gender operation views. "I think this was a very large dose of rationality for Australia, which has really gone off the deep end in terms of censorship," Elston told Fox News Digital following an Australian Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) ruling this week that Elston could leave his post on the platform. Elston added that the ruling was "a decisive victory" and declared that "Australians should rejoice because they're free to call a man a man, and a woman a woman." Marjorie Taylor Greene Pushes Bill To Punish Those Who Perform Gender Transition Measures On Minors X's official Global Government Affairs account reacted to the verdict, stating, "This is a decisive win for free speech in Australia and around the world. X will continue to fight against coercive state censorship and to defend our users' rights to free speech." Read On The Fox News App Elston shared a Daily Mail story on X in 2024 that exposed the identity and sexual proclivities of Teddy Cook, an Australian transgender male who had just been appointed to a WHO body tasked with drafting "care guidelines for trans and non-binary people." The Daily Mail reported that Cook has a "kinky track record in everything from bestiality to bondage, drugs and nudism." Elston posted the article to X and referred to Cook as a "she," in accordance with Cook's biological sex. In the caption to his original post, Elston wrote, "This woman (yes, she's female) is part of a panel of 20 'experts' hired by the @WHO to draft their policy on caring for 'trans people.' People who belong in psychiatric wards are writing the guidelines for people who belong in psychiatric wards." Police Arrest 'Billboard Chris,' Christian Activist In Eu Capital For Denouncing Child Transgender Treatments After his posts, Elston revealed that Australian eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant sent the activist and X a notice demanding they remove the posts because it amounted to "cyber abuse" of Cook. The government official then threatened X with a nearly $800,000 fine if the platform did not remove the post, prompting X and Elston's legal challenge. Lois McLatchie Miller, a spokesperson for Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) International – the legal group who coordinated Elston's case against the ruling along with Australia's Human Rights Law Alliance – explained to Fox News Digital how Grant tried to justify the demand to have Elston's speech removed from social media. According to the legal expert, Grant charged Elston and X with violating Australia's "Online Safety Act," alleging his post engaged in "cyber abuse against an Australian adult." Miller continued, "So they use that terminology to say that Chris's post should have been banned. But of course, that would give rise to or demand that Chris intended or the intention of his tweet was to bully someone to abuse them. And, of course, that was not the case." After a week-long hearing over Elston's case that occurred in March, ART reached a verdict Wednesday siding with the activist. According to ART Deputy President Damien O'Donovan, it was clear that Elston's post was not cyber abuse but a statement of his beliefs. Donovan stated in his ruling, "The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views Mr Elston has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent." "When the evidence is considered as a whole I am not satisfied that an ordinary reasonable person would conclude that by making the post Mr Elston intended to cause Mr Cook serious harm," he added. Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture Miller described Donovan's finding as a "really significant point," telling Fox News Digital that Elston's "intention was to keep his conviction to speak in the way that he thought was accurate and true. And to uphold the right of identity of women and children." Elston mentioned he felt his team beat the case on "every single legal point." "I think this sets a fantastic precedent going forward, and it should, at the very least, make Australians feel safe to say that a man is a man and a woman is a woman, because we've set a precedent for that," he said. Miller added, "This is a really significant early ruling in favor of free speech, which is going to be helpful for citizens all over the world as they tackle these new laws coming in." In a press release, ADF International executive director Paul Coleman celebrated the verdict. "This is a decisive win for free speech and sets an important precedent in the growing global debate over online censorship. In this case, the Australian government alarmingly censored the peaceful expression of a Canadian citizen on an American-owned platform, evidence of the expansive reach of censorial forces, even beyond national borders. Today, free speech has prevailed." The Australian eSafety Commission pointed Fox News Digital to their statement on ART's verdict, which read, "eSafety welcomes the guidance provided by the Tribunal on the statutory test for adult cyber abuse. We will continue to take seriously the responsibility of remediating online harms and protecting Australians from serious online harms."Original article source: Elon Musk's X and Billboard Chris celebrate 'decisive victory' against censorship in Australia
Sky News AU
04-07-2025
- Business
- Sky News AU
‘She's hopeless': Pauline Hanson says eSafety Commissioner should be sacked following loss of landmark censorship case
One Nation Leader Pauline Hanson says eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant should be 'thrown out of the job' following the Commissioner's recent track record, including losing a landmark case to a prominent Canadian activist. Chris Elston, known online as 'Billboard Chris', and Elon Musk's X prevailed in a major case against the eSafety Commission and transgender activist Teddy Cook on Tuesday following a ruling by the Administrative Review Tribunal. The ruling rescinded a takedown order issued by the eSafety Commissioner over a social media post by Mr Elston from February last year. In the post, the activist slammed a move to appoint Cook to a World Health Organisation panel drafting policy on caring for transgender people. Ms Inman Grant has also come under fire for advising Communications Minister Anika Wells to include YouTube in a social media ban for under 16s – which is set to come into effect from December 10. Ms Hanson has called out Ms Inman Grant in the wake of the Administrative Review Tribunal case ruling, claiming the commissioner is 'incompetent' and 'shouldn't be in the job at all'. 'By looks of it, she's a person pushing her own ideology, her own agenda, and she gets it wrong every time. She doesn't get it right, and it's been overturned that many times," Ms Hanson said told Sky News host Rowan Dean on Friday. The Queensland Senator also slammed Ms Inman Grant for seeking to have YouTube included in the social media ban, a move which Ms Hanson said she opposed. 'A lot of kids get some good information from YouTube. So I think that it's just gone too far, I think she's out of her depth, I don't think she knows what the hell she's doing.' She commended Mr Elston for winning the case against the Commission. 'I wish she'd ... be thrown out of the job. She's hopeless, useless,' Ms Hanson said. revealed on Thursday that about $66,000 of Australians' taxpayer dollars were spent on the eSafety Commission's legal costs to date in its defeat to Mr Elston and X Corp. 'eSafety notes the Administrative Review Tribunal's decision to set aside eSafety's decision to give a removal notice to X Corp relating to a post on X by Mr Elston," an eSafety spokesperson told 'This is the first case before the Tribunal seeking review of a decision where eSafety assessed the material met the criteria for adult cyber abuse.'
Sky News AU
03-07-2025
- Business
- Sky News AU
eSafety Commissioner wasted $66,000 of taxpayer money on court defeat to Elon Musk's X and 'Billboard Chris'
About $66,000 of Australians' taxpayer money was wasted on the eSafety Commissioner's court defeat to X Corp and Canadian activist Chris Elston, can reveal. Elon Musk's X and Mr Elston, also known as 'Billboard Chris' scored a major win over eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant and transgender activist Teddy Cook in a landmark ruling from the Administrative Review Tribunal on Tuesday. The ruling rescinded a takedown order issued by the eSafety Commissioner over a social media post on X from February 2024 where Mr Elston, blasted the proposed appointment of Mr Cook, a biological female, to a World Health Organisation panel. In the post, he wrote: 'This woman (yes, she's female) is part of a panel of 20 'experts' hired by the WHO to draft their policy on caring for 'trans people'. People who belong in psychiatric wards are writing the guidelines for people who belong in psychiatric wards.' Ms Grant labelled the remarks 'degrading' and issued a takedown notice to X on March 22, 2024 threatening the company with a fine of up to $782,500 for any refusal to remove the post. While X complied and blocked the post, the company and Mr Elston filed a legal challenge which culminated in Tuesday's victory. An eSafety spokesperson acknowledged the ruling and said its legal costs to date from responding to X Corp/Mr Elston's application review were "approximately $66,000". 'eSafety notes the Administrative Review Tribunal's decision to set aside eSafety's decision to give a removal notice to X Corp relating to a post on X by Mr Elston," the spokesperson told 'This is the first case before the Tribunal seeking review of a decision where eSafety assessed the material met the criteria for adult cyber abuse. 'eSafety welcomes the guidance provided by the Tribunal on the statutory test for adult cyber abuse. We will continue to take seriously the responsibility of remediating online harms and protecting Australians from serious online harms." Speaking to Sky News Australia on Wednesday, Mr Elston described the hearing as a 'total destruction' of Ms Inman Grant's case against him, and claimed all of the eSafety Commissioner's 'so-called experts' were 'basically dismissed'. Mr Elston said the Administrative Review Tribunal deputy president Damien O'Donovan had judged Billboard Chris acted in accordance to his convictions. Under the Online Safety Act, eSafety has the power to order the removal of a post if the material is found to meet the criteria of targeting a particular Australian adult that is both intended to cause serious harm and is also menacing, harassing or offensive in all circumstances. But Mr O'Donovan said there was no evidence Mr Elston intended for Mr Cook to read or receive the post he shared on X. 'In the absence of any evidence that Mr Elston intended that Mr Cook would receive and read the post, and in light of the broader explanation as to why Mr Elston made the post, I am satisfied that an ordinary reasonable person would not conclude that it is likely that the post was intended to have an effect of causing serious harm to Mr Cook,' his ruling read.
Sky News AU
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Sky News AU
Canadian activist 'Billboard Chris' hails ‘tremendous victory' against eSafety Commissioner and the censorious ‘regime of fear' in Australia
Canadian activist Chris Elston, known online as 'Billboard Chris', said he and his lawyers are 'extremely pleased' after he and Elon Musk's X won a major case against the eSafety Commission and transgender activist Teddy Cook this week. Mr Elston described the hearing as a 'total destruction' of Ms Inman Grant's case against him, and claimed all of the eSafety Commissioner's 'so-called experts' were 'basically dismissed'. The ruling, handed down on Tuesday evening, rescinded a takedown order issued by the eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant for a social media post made by Mr Elston in February last year. Mr Elston's post criticised the World Health Organisation's appointment of Mr Cook to an expert panel to draft policy on caring for transgender people. In the post, he wrote: 'This woman (yes, she's female) is part of a panel of 20 'experts' hired by the WHO to draft their policy on caring for 'trans people'. People who belong in psychiatric wards are writing the guidelines for people who belong in psychiatric wards.' The eSafety Commissioner called the post degrading and issued X with the takedown notice in March and threatened a $782,500 fine if the social media giant refused. Speaking to Sky News on Wednesday evening, Mr Elston said the Administrative Review Tribunal deputy president Damien O'Donovan had judged Billboard Chris acted in accordance to his convictions. '(Mr O'Donovan) even quoted my own testimony where I said that because I believe sex is immutable I'm personally convicted,' he said. Mr Elston said when the deputy president looked at his entire campaign, he saw Billboard Chris had been consistent on this matter. 'My post itself was not about causing serious distress or harm to Teddy Cook. It was about bringing light to a situation where children are being harmed. And we sometimes forget that. This is all about the kids,' he said. Mr Elston said the tendency across the West, not just Australia, was to 'cancel' people and get them fired to instill a 'regime of fear being pushed by these bureaucrats'. He said in his case, Ms Inman Grant was an 'unelected bureaucrat' who only censored in 'one direction.' 'I think this is a tremendous victory. We're stacking up some wins against these censors across the globe,' he said. 'This is, I think, the third victory against the e-Safety commissioner. They keep throwing money at this though because they have inexhaustible resources, but we have something they don't have. We have the truth and we're just going to keep spreading it because the truth spreads for free.' Billboard Chris made headlines after he was approached by a Brisbane City Council in Queen Street Mall while he held a sign stating 'children cannot consent to puberty blockers', who accused him of obstructing people's movement. The council worker went on to issue Mr Elston with an $806 fine for 'obstructing or unreasonably disturbing any person lawfully using a mall', a claim the activist calmly insisted was untrue. Mr Elston's sign reflected current Queensland law after the state government issued a directive banning puberty blockers and cross sex hormones for new patients suffering gender dysphoria earlier this year. Asked if he would come back to Australia following after the recent run-ins, Mr Elston said he would certainly return. 'Not only are they trying to censor me on the digital town square, every physical town square I go into in Australia, they're trying to remove me,' he said. Mr Elston said he had recently secured victory against Brisbane City Council after he challenged the fine. 'This is how we have to act. We can't just let these censors tell us what to do. I'm having conversations about children who are being harmed,' he said. 'Other people go to that town square, they do whatever they want. They actually obstruct people. I did nothing of the sort. So I think I'm going to sue Brisbane City Council as well now that ticket has been thrown out and I'll probably come back just for that.
The Advertiser
02-07-2025
- Politics
- The Advertiser
Elon Musk victory in war on strict Australian web laws
"A win for free speech in Australia." This is what Elon Musk's lawyers have said after overturning government orders blocking a post claiming transgender people belonged in a mental institution. Musk's social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, and Canadian activist Christopher Elston have been in a legal battle with the eSafety Commissioner. Mr Elston reposted a Daily Mail article in February 2024 about Australian transgender man Teddy Cook and his appointment by the World Health Organisation to advise on issues of transgender and non-binary people's health. In the post, Mr Elston called Mr Cook a female and said trans people "belong in psychiatric wards". When Mr Cook came across the post, he made a complaint to the eSafety Commissioner which moved to block the post. Mr Elston's words were allegedly degrading to Mr Cook and the broader transgender community, the online regulator said. The activist's X account allegedly had more than 395,000 followers and the post was viewed 377,000 times and reposted 6,000 times in less than a fortnight. After X and Mr Elston challenged the notice, the Administrative Review Tribunal was asked to determine whether an everyday person would consider the post as cyber-abuse. Tribunal member Damien O'Donovan found late on Tuesday that the post did not intend to cause serious harm. However, he found the ordinary person would take away that transgender people belong in a psychiatric ward. "The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views Mr Elston has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent," Mr O'Donovan said. X, through its lawyers at Thompson Geer, welcomed the decision. "This is another example of the eSafety Commissioner overreaching in her role and making politically motivated decisions to moderate what she considers Australians should and shouldn't read and hear from the outside world." Mr Elston said the decision sends a clear message to the government that it "does not have the authority to silence peaceful expression." In the tribunal hearing, lawyers for Mr Elston denied he intended to cause serious harm. The Canadian said he didn't know Mr Cook, reposted public information and usually misgendered people in his posts. A spokesperson for the eSafety Commissioner noted the decision saying the regulator would continue to take seriously the responsibility of amending harms and protecting Australians. The decision is the most recent chapter in a long-running legal battle between the social media giant and online safety regulator. In May, the commissioner took X to court wanting the platform to do more to keep Australians safe online. The regulator also issued a penalty of $610,500 to the social media giant in February 2023, alleging it failed to adequately respond to questions about how it tackled harmful content on its platform, including child sexual abuse material. X is disputing the fine. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578 "A win for free speech in Australia." This is what Elon Musk's lawyers have said after overturning government orders blocking a post claiming transgender people belonged in a mental institution. Musk's social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, and Canadian activist Christopher Elston have been in a legal battle with the eSafety Commissioner. Mr Elston reposted a Daily Mail article in February 2024 about Australian transgender man Teddy Cook and his appointment by the World Health Organisation to advise on issues of transgender and non-binary people's health. In the post, Mr Elston called Mr Cook a female and said trans people "belong in psychiatric wards". When Mr Cook came across the post, he made a complaint to the eSafety Commissioner which moved to block the post. Mr Elston's words were allegedly degrading to Mr Cook and the broader transgender community, the online regulator said. The activist's X account allegedly had more than 395,000 followers and the post was viewed 377,000 times and reposted 6,000 times in less than a fortnight. After X and Mr Elston challenged the notice, the Administrative Review Tribunal was asked to determine whether an everyday person would consider the post as cyber-abuse. Tribunal member Damien O'Donovan found late on Tuesday that the post did not intend to cause serious harm. However, he found the ordinary person would take away that transgender people belong in a psychiatric ward. "The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views Mr Elston has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent," Mr O'Donovan said. X, through its lawyers at Thompson Geer, welcomed the decision. "This is another example of the eSafety Commissioner overreaching in her role and making politically motivated decisions to moderate what she considers Australians should and shouldn't read and hear from the outside world." Mr Elston said the decision sends a clear message to the government that it "does not have the authority to silence peaceful expression." In the tribunal hearing, lawyers for Mr Elston denied he intended to cause serious harm. The Canadian said he didn't know Mr Cook, reposted public information and usually misgendered people in his posts. A spokesperson for the eSafety Commissioner noted the decision saying the regulator would continue to take seriously the responsibility of amending harms and protecting Australians. The decision is the most recent chapter in a long-running legal battle between the social media giant and online safety regulator. In May, the commissioner took X to court wanting the platform to do more to keep Australians safe online. The regulator also issued a penalty of $610,500 to the social media giant in February 2023, alleging it failed to adequately respond to questions about how it tackled harmful content on its platform, including child sexual abuse material. X is disputing the fine. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578 "A win for free speech in Australia." This is what Elon Musk's lawyers have said after overturning government orders blocking a post claiming transgender people belonged in a mental institution. Musk's social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, and Canadian activist Christopher Elston have been in a legal battle with the eSafety Commissioner. Mr Elston reposted a Daily Mail article in February 2024 about Australian transgender man Teddy Cook and his appointment by the World Health Organisation to advise on issues of transgender and non-binary people's health. In the post, Mr Elston called Mr Cook a female and said trans people "belong in psychiatric wards". When Mr Cook came across the post, he made a complaint to the eSafety Commissioner which moved to block the post. Mr Elston's words were allegedly degrading to Mr Cook and the broader transgender community, the online regulator said. The activist's X account allegedly had more than 395,000 followers and the post was viewed 377,000 times and reposted 6,000 times in less than a fortnight. After X and Mr Elston challenged the notice, the Administrative Review Tribunal was asked to determine whether an everyday person would consider the post as cyber-abuse. Tribunal member Damien O'Donovan found late on Tuesday that the post did not intend to cause serious harm. However, he found the ordinary person would take away that transgender people belong in a psychiatric ward. "The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views Mr Elston has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent," Mr O'Donovan said. X, through its lawyers at Thompson Geer, welcomed the decision. "This is another example of the eSafety Commissioner overreaching in her role and making politically motivated decisions to moderate what she considers Australians should and shouldn't read and hear from the outside world." Mr Elston said the decision sends a clear message to the government that it "does not have the authority to silence peaceful expression." In the tribunal hearing, lawyers for Mr Elston denied he intended to cause serious harm. The Canadian said he didn't know Mr Cook, reposted public information and usually misgendered people in his posts. A spokesperson for the eSafety Commissioner noted the decision saying the regulator would continue to take seriously the responsibility of amending harms and protecting Australians. The decision is the most recent chapter in a long-running legal battle between the social media giant and online safety regulator. In May, the commissioner took X to court wanting the platform to do more to keep Australians safe online. The regulator also issued a penalty of $610,500 to the social media giant in February 2023, alleging it failed to adequately respond to questions about how it tackled harmful content on its platform, including child sexual abuse material. X is disputing the fine. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578 "A win for free speech in Australia." This is what Elon Musk's lawyers have said after overturning government orders blocking a post claiming transgender people belonged in a mental institution. Musk's social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, and Canadian activist Christopher Elston have been in a legal battle with the eSafety Commissioner. Mr Elston reposted a Daily Mail article in February 2024 about Australian transgender man Teddy Cook and his appointment by the World Health Organisation to advise on issues of transgender and non-binary people's health. In the post, Mr Elston called Mr Cook a female and said trans people "belong in psychiatric wards". When Mr Cook came across the post, he made a complaint to the eSafety Commissioner which moved to block the post. Mr Elston's words were allegedly degrading to Mr Cook and the broader transgender community, the online regulator said. The activist's X account allegedly had more than 395,000 followers and the post was viewed 377,000 times and reposted 6,000 times in less than a fortnight. After X and Mr Elston challenged the notice, the Administrative Review Tribunal was asked to determine whether an everyday person would consider the post as cyber-abuse. Tribunal member Damien O'Donovan found late on Tuesday that the post did not intend to cause serious harm. However, he found the ordinary person would take away that transgender people belong in a psychiatric ward. "The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views Mr Elston has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent," Mr O'Donovan said. X, through its lawyers at Thompson Geer, welcomed the decision. "This is another example of the eSafety Commissioner overreaching in her role and making politically motivated decisions to moderate what she considers Australians should and shouldn't read and hear from the outside world." Mr Elston said the decision sends a clear message to the government that it "does not have the authority to silence peaceful expression." In the tribunal hearing, lawyers for Mr Elston denied he intended to cause serious harm. The Canadian said he didn't know Mr Cook, reposted public information and usually misgendered people in his posts. A spokesperson for the eSafety Commissioner noted the decision saying the regulator would continue to take seriously the responsibility of amending harms and protecting Australians. The decision is the most recent chapter in a long-running legal battle between the social media giant and online safety regulator. In May, the commissioner took X to court wanting the platform to do more to keep Australians safe online. The regulator also issued a penalty of $610,500 to the social media giant in February 2023, alleging it failed to adequately respond to questions about how it tackled harmful content on its platform, including child sexual abuse material. X is disputing the fine. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578
