{"version":"1.0","type":"rich","provider_name":"Acast","provider_url":"https://acast.com","height":250,"width":700,"html":"<iframe src=\"https://embed.acast.com/$/61e878a1419a9b0013b27134/61fd71f5bb6c000012563b93?\" frameBorder=\"0\" width=\"700\" height=\"250\"></iframe>","title":"Defamation Down Under","thumbnail_width":200,"thumbnail_height":200,"thumbnail_url":"https://open-images.acast.com/shows/undefined/1642625091768-3ba901c505852d077e44a35fab2cfb73.jpeg?height=200","description":"<p><br></p><p>Just two days ago, on September 28, CNN&nbsp;<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/cnn-restricts-access-to-facebook-pages-in-australia-11632868267\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">announced</a>&nbsp;that it was turning off access to its Facebook pages in Australia. Why would the network cut off Facebook users Down Under?</p><p>It’s not a protest of Facebook or… Australians. CNN’s move was prompted by a&nbsp;<a href=\"https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/24/technology/facebook-australia-comments.html\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">recent ruling</a>&nbsp;by the High Court of Australia in&nbsp;<a href=\"https://eresources.hcourt.gov.au/downloadPdf/2021/HCA/27\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\"><em>Fairfax Media and Voller</em></a><em>,&nbsp;</em>which held that media companies can be held liable for defamatory statements made by&nbsp;<em>third parties&nbsp;</em>in the comments on their public pages,&nbsp;<em>even if they didn’t know about them</em>. This is a pretty extraordinary expansion of potential liability for organizations that run public pages with a lot of engagement.</p><p>On this week’s episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the online information ecosystem, Evelyn Douek and Quinta Jurecic spoke with David Rolph, a professor at the University</p>","author_name":"Lawfare & University of Texas Law School"}