Trust & Safety policies tend to be concerned with the well-being of those content moderators who are exposed to severe content violations. However, most moderators review content across a broad severity spectrum ranging from benign to egregious. Given that perceptions of content severity among moderators are yet to be fully understood, this study used a sequential design to qualitatively peruse the views of 34 moderators in the US and the Philippines alongside those of 166 support professionals (mental health, learning experience, and team lead staff) in relation to content severity and its perceived impact on moderators’ well-being and job accuracy. Thematic analyses of data revealed two overarching themes. In the first theme of ‘perceived content categories’, both moderators and support professionals broadly distinguished between ‘moderate’ and ‘graphic’ content. Under the second theme of ‘content impact on moderator’s well-being’, a majority of participants attributed more detrimental effects to working with moderate content on well-being and job accuracy than to reviewing graphic content, largely due to the lack of wellness support and care offered to moderate content queues. This study, in lending voice to both moderators and support professionals’ observations, offers participant-led recommendations for work policy and future research.