Facebook ruling sparks call for defamation law overhaul

Media companies will be held ­legally responsible for posts by readers on Facebook under a landmark court ruling.

AA Supreme Court lawsuit relates to comments made about Dylan Voller on 10 Facebook posts. Picture: Tertius Pickard

Media companies will be held ­legally responsible for posts by readers on Facebook under a landmark court ruling that has prompted calls for an urgent overhaul of defamation laws.

NSW Supreme Court judge Stephen Rothman found that major media companies News Corp Australia and Nine Entertainment could be regarded as the publishers of Facebook comments made by users of the social media platform.

The ruling came in the case of former Northern Territory youth detainee Dylan Voller against media outlets over comments made by readers on Facebook.

Mr Voller, whose mistreatment in the Don Dale Youth Detentio­n Centre triggered a 2016 royal commission, is suing The Australian andThe Centralian Advocate, Sky News Australia’s The Bolt Report, and Nine’s The Sydney Morning Herald.

The NSW Supreme Court lawsuit relates to comments made about Mr Voller by members of the public on 10 Facebook posts published in 2016 and 2017, which he alleges carry false and defamatory imputations.

Justice Rothman noted it was not alleged that the companies were negligent in allowing the comments to remain on the public­ Facebook page, or reckless in failing to delete them once they were aware of material.

News Corp Australia said the “ruling shows how far out of step Australia’s ­defamation laws are with other English-speaking democracies and highlights the urgent need for change’’.

“It defies belief that media ­organisations are held respon­sible for comments made by other people on social media pages. It is ridiculous that the media company­ is held responsible while Facebook, which gives us no ability to turn off comments on its platform, bears no responsibility at all.”

In finding the companies were the publishers­, the judge said the media outlets’ use of a public Facebook page was about their own commercial interests.

The primary purpose was to ­“optimise readership of the newspaper (whether hard copy or digital) or broadcast and to optimise advertising revenue”, Justice Rothman said. He acknowledged it was the third-party user that placed the comment on the page. But he said the evidence showed that each company had the means effectively to delay the publication of the comments and to monitor whether any were defamatory, before releasing them.

News Corp Australia was “carefully reviewing the judgment with a view to an appeal”, the spokeswoman said.

A spokesman for The Sydney Morning Herald said it was considering its options as well as “the implications the ruling may have on the industry”.

The case related to comments that included a claim that Mr Voller attacked a Salvation Army officer who visited him in detention, leaving the man blind in one eye, and also that he was a rapist.

The landmark ruling by Justice Rothman comes as News Corp Australia, Nine and ABC bosses Michael Miller, Hugh Marks and David Anderson prepare to ask the Morrison government this week for an overhaul of media protection laws following Australian Federal Police raids. The raids drew the ire of media, and raised concerns about diminishing press freedom in Australia.

ADDITIONAL REPORTING: AAP