CANBERRA, Australia (AP) – Australia’s highest court on Wednesday handed down a decisive ruling that the media are “editors” of allegedly defamatory comments posted by third parties on its official Facebook pages.
The high court rejected an argument by some of Australia’s most important media organizations – Fairfax Media Publications, Nationwide News and the Australian News Channel – that people should be editors, should be aware of the defamatory content and intend to transmit it.
The court determined in a 5-2 majority decision that, by facilitating and encouraging comments, companies had participated in its communication.
The decision opens media organizations to be sued for defamation by former juvenile detainee Dylan Voller.
Voller wants to denounce the TV station and newspaper editors for comments on the Facebook pages of The Sydney Morning Herald, The Australian, Centralian Advocate, Sky News Australia and The Bolt Report.
His defamation case launched in New South Wales State Supreme Court in 2017 was suspended while the separate issue of whether media companies were responsible for Facebook users ’comments was decided.
The companies published content on their pages about news items that referred to the Voller era in a juvenile detention center in the Northern Territory.
Facebook users responded by posting comments that Voller alleged were defamatory.
News Corp Australia, owner of the two broadcast programs and two of the three newspapers subject to the defamation case, called for the law to be changed.
The opinion was “significant to anyone who maintains a public social media page when they find that they may be responsible for comments posted by other people on that page, even when they are unaware of those comments,” the president said in a statement. News Corp Australia executive Michael Miller.
“This highlights the need for urgent legislative reform and I call on Australian Attorneys General to address this anomaly and align Australian legislation with comparable Western democracies,” Miller added.
Nine, the new owner of The Sydney Morning Herald, said he hoped a current review of defamation laws by Australian state and territorial governments would take into account the resolution and its consequences for publishers.
“Obviously, we are disappointed with the outcome of this decision, as it will have ramifications for what we can post on social media in the future,” a Nine statement said.
“We also take note of the positive steps that Facebook likes have taken since the Voller case began, which now allow editors to turn off story comments,” Nine added.
Facebook did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Voller’s attorneys welcomed the sentencing for its broader implications for publishers.
“This is a historic breakthrough in the justice achieved for Dylan and also in the protection of people, especially those who are in a vulnerable position, from being the object of mob attacks on unrestricted social media,” it was said in a statement from lawyers.
“This decision put the responsibility where it should be; about media companies with huge resources, to control public comment in circumstances where they know there is a high likelihood of defaming a person, ”the statement added.
The decision of the High Court confirms the rulings of two lower courts on liability.
The courts have previously ruled that people can be held responsible for the continued posting of defamatory statements on the platforms they control, such as bulletin boards, only after hearing the comments.