SOCIAL
Australian High Court Ruling Could See Media Outets Held Legally Accountable for their Facebook Posts

A new legal ruling could have major implications for how news content is shared online, and ensuring less sensationalism in Facebook posts, specifically, which have been designed to trigger maximum response.
Last week, the Australian High Court upheld a ruling which, in some circumstances, could see Australian media outlets held liable for user comments left on their respective Facebook Pages.
The finding has sparked a new range of concerns around potentially limiting journalistic free speech, and impeding reporting capacity. But the complexity of the case goes deeper than the initial headline. Yes, the High Court ruling does provide more scope for media outlets to be held legally accountable for comments made on their social media pages, but the full nuance of the ruling is more specifically aimed at ensuring incendiary posts are not being shared with the clear intent of baiting comments and shares.
The case stems from an investigation in 2016, which found that inmates of a youth detention center in Darwin had been severely mistreated, even tortured, during their confinement. Within the subsequent media coverage of the incident, some outlets had sought to provide more context on the victims of this torture, with a handful of publications singling out the criminal records of said victims as an alternate narrative in the case.
One of the former inmates, Dylan Voller, claims that the subsequent media depictions of him were both incorrect and defamatory, which lead to Voller seeking legal damages for the published claims. Voller himself had become the focus of several articles, including a pierce in The Australian headlined “Dylan Voller’s list of jailhouse incidents tops 200”, which highlighted the many wrongs Voller had reportedly committed that had lead to his incarceration.
The case as it relates to Facebook comments, specifically, came about when these reports were republished to the Facebook Pages of the outlets in question. The core of Voller’s argument is that the framing of these articles, within Facebook posts specifically, prompted negative comments from users of the platform, which Voller’s defense team has argued was designed to provoke more comments and engagement on these posts, and therefore garner more reach within Facebook’s algorithm.
As such, the essence of the case boils down to a critical point – it’s not that publications can now be sued for people’s comments on their Facebook posts, in simplified terms, but it relates to how the content is framed in such posts, and whether there can be a definitive link shown between the Facebook post itself, and whether that has lured defamatory comments, and community perception, which can harm an individual (it’s not clear that the same regulations would extend to an entity, as such).
Indeed, in the original case notes, Voller’s legal team argued that the publications in question:
“Should have known that there was a “significant risk of defamatory observations” after posting, partly due to the nature of the articles”
As such, the complexities here extend far beyond the topline finding that publishers can now be sued for comments posted to their Facebook Page, because the real impetus here is that those publishing any content to Facebook on behalf of a media publisher need to be more careful in the actual wording of their posts. Because if subsequent defamatory comments can be linked back to the post itself, and the publisher is then found to have incited such response, then legal action can be sought.
In other words, publishers can re-share whatever they like, so long as they remain aligned to the facts, and don’t look to share intentionally incendiary social media posts around any such incident.
Case in point, here’s another article published by The Australian on the Dylan Voller case, which, as you can imagine, has also attracted a long list of critical and negative remarks.

But the post itself is not defamatory, it’s merely stating the facts – it’s a quote from an MP, and there’s no direct evidence to suggest that the publisher has sought to bait Facebook users into commenting based on the article shared.
Which is the real point in question here – the ruling puts more onus on publishers to consider the framing of their Facebook posts as a means to lure comments. If the publisher is seen to be inciting negative comments, then they can be held liable for such – but there has to be definitive evidence to show both damages to the individual and intent within their social media post, specifically, not the linked article, which could then lead to prosecution.
Which may actually be a better way to go. Over the past decade, media incentives have been altered so significantly by online algorithms because of the clear benefit for publishers to share anger-inducing, emotionally charged headlines in order to spark comments and shares, which then ensures maximum reach.
That’s extended to misinterpretations, half-truths and downright lies in order to trigger that user response, and if there’s a way that publishers can be held accountable for such, that seems like a beneficial approach, as opposed to proposed reforms to Section 230 laws in the US which would more severely limit press freedoms.
Again, this ruling relates to Facebook posts specifically, and the wording of such being designed to trigger emotional response in order to lure engagement. Proving a definitive link between a Facebook update and any personal damages will still remain difficult, as it is in all cases of defamation. But maybe, this finding will prompt Facebook Page managers at media outlets to be more factual in their updates, as opposed to comment-baiting to trigger algorithm reach.
As such, while it does open up media outlets to increased liability, it could actually be a path forward for instituting more factual reporting, and holding publishers to account for triggering online mob attacks based on their angling of a case.
Because it’s clear that this is happening – the best way to attract comments and shares on Facebook is to trigger emotional reaction, which then prompts people to comment, share, etc.
If a Facebook post is found to be clearly prompting such, and that can cause reputational damage, that seems like a positive step – though inevitably it does come with increased risk for social media managers.
SOCIAL
Merriam-Webster’s 2023 Word of the Year

The wordsmiths over at Merriam-Webster have announced their official “Word of the Year for 2023,” they say it’s something we are “thinking about, writing about, aspiring to, and judging more” than ever.
The word is authentic.
According to the dictionary, the most common definitions of authentic are “not false or imitation,” “being true to one’s own personality, spirit, or character,” and “worthy of acceptance or belief as conforming to or based on fact.”
Merriam-Webster says the word saw a “substantial increase” in lookups this year. That’s probably because we now live in a world where artificial intelligence, deepfake technology and questionable memes challenge our basic notions of reality.
Authenticity is also seen as a commodity at a time when influencers build their brands on social media while attempting to seamlessly pitch their “favorite” products. These days, the average person scrolls through over 43 feet of content every day on social media. After being exposed to countless images of people, it becomes easier to spot the phonies from those who are being their authentic selves.
“When we look at common threads across the thousands of influencer marketing campaigns we’ve run at The Outloud Group over the last 15 years, the similarity between all of our best-performing brand creator partnerships is pretty simple: true authenticity,” Bradley Hoos, CEO of The Outland Group, a full-service influencer marketing agency, writes in Forbes.
Merriam-Webster adds that authenticity is a trait people strove to find for themselves in 2023.
“Celebrities like singers Lainey Wilson, Sam Smith, and especially Taylor Swift all made headlines in 2023 with statements about seeking their ‘authentic voice’ and ‘authentic self,” Merriam-Webster writes. “Headlines like Three Ways To Tap Into Taylor Swift’s Authenticity And Build An Eras-Like Workplace associate this quality with pop-culture superpower.”
The dictionary also highlighted more words that trended in 2023, including:
“Rizz” — Internet slang for “romantic appeal or charm” (noun) or “to charm, seduce” (verb), popularized by YouTuber Kai Cenat, was added to the dictionary.
“Deepfake” — Altered images or recordings that convincingly misrepresent someone’s actions or words, making it hard to distinguish between real and fake.
“Coronation” — The crowning of a new British monarch, King Charles III, sent people to the dictionary’s website to learn the term’s meaning.
“Dystopian” — In 2023, “dystopian” was a verb applied to many frightening real-world issues and was used to describe the trend in video games, books and movies depicting a dark future.
“EGOT” — Lookups for “EGOT” spiked in February when Viola Davis won a Grammy for the audiobook version of her memoir. That made her one of the 18 people to become an EGOT, or winner of an Emmy, Grammy, Oscar and Tony awards.
“X” — When Twitter was rebranded as X on July 23, searches for the term spiked at Merriam-Webster.com, where curious people went to discover more about the mysterious letter.
“Implode” — When a submersible that went to visit the remains of the Titanic in June imploded, the term had a considerable spike as people attempted to learn more about the passengers’ fate.
“Doppelgänger” — This term got hot multiple times in 2023. It trended twice due to stories out of Germany and New York involving the attempted murder or suicide of someone’s lookalike. Further, September saw the release of Naomi Klein’s book, “Doppelgänger: A Trip Into the Mirror World.”
SOCIAL
X Experiments with New Grok AI Access Buttons In-Stream

I’m not sure that X’s “Grok” AI chatbot is ever going to become a major element of the in-app experience. But owner Elon Musk has invested a lot into the new tool, so soon, it’ll be added to a lot more surfaces in the app, as X looks to make it a bigger enticement to get more subscribers to its X Premium+ subscription offering.
Last week, Musk noted that, soon, Grok would be available to analyze X posts in-stream.
In order to facilitate this, X is now looking to add a new Grok button to the lower function bar in the app, seemingly, at this stage a least, replacing the current Communities shortcut.
As you can see in this example, posted by X News Daily, a new Grok button may soon be displayed in prominent position, right in the middle of the bottom tray. Which would then make it easier to consult Grok for analysis of content, or potentially to assist in post creation, while there’s also another Grok tab in the sidebar, providing alternative access.

All of this is still in flux, as X works out the best placement for the option. But one way or another, Grok is coming to the main X UI, which could see a lot more content being pumped out by Elon’s sarcasm-focused AI bot, which is trained on real-time X conversation and data.
Though, presumably, access will remain limited.
Right now, Grok is only available to selected users who have subscribed to X’s highest-priced “X Premium+” monthly subscription package, which currently costs $US16 per month. X is rolling out Grok access to Premium+ subscribers based on when they signed up to the program, as it gradually expands the presence of its AI chatbot tool.
You would assume, then, that these new buttons and Grok analysis options will only be made available to those who are paying a premium for the app, though whether that’s actually worth the $US168 a year (annual plan) to gain access is another question.
But then again, millions of people have signed up to ChatGPT, and Elon seems confident that Grok will be as good, if not better than that. And in that sense, maybe Grok will prove to be a winner, which could then help X to maximize its subscription revenue intake, and broaden its income streams.
It’s impossible to say, because Grok is only in limited access, and as such, there’s not a lot of insight as to its potential value, or not, as yet.
But Elon wants to ensure that there remains a generative AI option that’s not biased, and not censored, a market gap that he believes Grok can fill. And again, given his investment in the required technology (Elon reportedly spent “tens of millions of dollars” on GPUs for his alternative AI project), he’ll also be looking to glean some return on that outlay, which will likely see X looking to make as big a push on Grok as it can to maximize interest.
Whether that’s a positive or negative, we’ll soon find out.
SOCIAL
Beyond the buzz: Blue Tick’s formula for social media success

Photo courtesy of Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels
Opinions expressed by Digital Journal contributors are their own.
Breaking through the constant clamor of the social media world is no easy feat. With the world more interconnected than ever, attention isn’t just a valuable commodity, it’s the currency brands and marketers trade in. This bustling digital bazaar has brands tripping over themselves to capture even a fleeting glance from consumers, and while some do it successfully, many often fail. Blue Tick Ltd is one of the pioneering brands that understand the rhythm and flow of the online attention economy.
Under the dynamic leadership of its founder, Dylan, Blue Tick doesn’t chase attention — it commands it. A community marketing expert with wide-ranging expertise, Dylan has always had a keen eye for what works. Thanks to his fascination with the nuances of social media strategies and consumer engagement, he proudly holds a bachelor’s degree in marketing communications and a master’s degree in digital marketing. That fascination was also the catalyst for Blue Tick, an enterprise that reimagines the connection between brands and their communities.
“In school, I led several successful social media campaigns that not only increased engagement with campus events but also brought significant online attention to my academic community,” Dylan recalls. “After graduating, I founded a community marketing company called Blue Tick.” This community doesn’t merely aim to increase visibility but strives to forge a bond with audiences through authenticity and innovation. Unlike traditional advertising, community marketing is about creating a living, breathing ecosystem around a brand.
At Blue Tick, the focus isn’t on broadcasting messages but on creating dialogues, recognizing that a personalized touch can turn a passive observer into an active participant and brand advocate. In a digital terrain where every brand is a storyteller, Blue Tick’s narrative is distinct. It isn’t about adding more noise; it’s about fine-tuning the message to reach the right ears. Their approach is both an art and a science, melding creative content with a laser-focused targeting system backed by robust data analytics.
“My work has proven that combining creative content with precise targeting can create impactful online experiences,” Dylan explains. Blue Tick’s marketing campaigns aren’t just seen but felt. The content they create isn’t just encountered by consumers; they experience it. As Dylan explains, “Our campaigns are more than just text and images; we also include interactive content, gamified elements, and storytelling that make the brand more vivid and interesting and stand out in the busy world of social media.” Every campaign they roll out isn’t just a series of ads; they’re the opening lines to a conversation that makes every single person feel seen and heard.
Data-driven decision-making is another of Blue Tick Ltd’s pillars. The company meticulously analyzes consumer data to understand preferences, behaviors, and trends. This insight allows them to craft marketing strategies that are not only creative but also incredibly targeted. “The content I receive is more relevant, making me more likely to pay attention, share, or make a purchase,” says one consumer, highlighting the impact of Blue Tick’s data-driven strategies.
Over the years, Dylan’s team hasn’t just understood the landscape of social media marketing; they have redefined it. As their success proves, community marketing succeeds because consumers become brand ambassadors who not only love the products but also feel a deep connection to the brand’s ethos. With Blue Tick, it’s clear that the future of marketing is not just about reaching audiences; it’s about speaking directly to the consumer’s heart, turning every campaign into a conversation, and every consumer into a community member.
-
FACEBOOK5 days ago
Indian Government Warns Facebook, YouTube About Deepfakes, Misinformation Violations
-
MARKETING4 days ago
Whiteboard Friday Recap 2023: AI Edition
-
MARKETING7 days ago
“Undercover” Case Studies: Why the Future of Marketing Is Proving Yourself in the Field
-
SOCIAL6 days ago
17-Year-Old Claims To Make 6 Figures A Year
-
SEARCHENGINES7 days ago
Follower Count Is Not A Google Search Ranking Factor
-
SOCIAL6 days ago
Meta Stock: Still Room For Upside In A Maturing Market (NASDAQ:META)
-
SEARCHENGINES6 days ago
Google Testing “Simple Search” Refinement Option
-
SOCIAL7 days ago
X Withdraws From MRC Brand Safety Accreditation