There will never be a consensus. It's whatever the shifting Supreme Court says it is. If you have the money to get that far. As Justice Potter said in a 1964 decision defining obscenity, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it..." I call it the "I know it when I feel it" test. That is as specific as many of these things can get. You would think that something as simple as exposing organised animal abuse would be a no-brainer as protected speech. But it isn't. On another level, it is what local law enforcement says it is, unless you have the money to fight back. Even making a Facebook post denigrating an ex-husband/cop for something silly or liking that post can get you arrested.