YouTube has been ordered to pay a politician £410,000 for hosting abusive videos that led to his resignation from politics.

Photo of author

By Creative Media News

Google was found to have knowingly profited from “relentless, racist, vilifying, abusive, and defamatory” films aimed at the former deputy premier of New South Wales, John Barilaro.

The finding is the most recent in a string of court decisions and government measures in Australia that have sought to hold social media firms accountable for the content of their users.

In contrast to the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, Australian law holds internet platforms to the same legal standards as publishers for the content they host.

John Barilaro, the former deputy premier of New South Wales – the country’s most populous state and home to Sydney – stated that he left politics because of the offensive YouTube videos.

Australia’s Federal Court said on Monday that YouTube, which is owned by Google, intentionally benefited from two videos that had been seen about 800,000 times since they were uploaded in 2020.

Judge Steve Rares stated that the films, which targeted Mr. Barilaro’s Italian background and made unsubstantiated claims that he was “corrupt,” constituted “nothing less than hate speech.”

Judge Rares stated that Google violated its own standards aimed at protecting public figures and, as a result, “forced Mr. Barilaro to leave his chosen duty in public life early and seriously traumatized him.”

Friendly Jordie’s creator Jordan Shanks has 625,000 YouTube subscribers and 346,000 Facebook followers.

Shanks was initially a co-defendant in the case until he negotiated a settlement with the lawmaker last year for A$100,000 (£57k). In addition, the settlement required him to modify some of his movies about Mr. Barilaro.

“Google cannot avoid accountability for the severe harm created by Mr. Shanks’ effort,” declared Judge Rares.

Mr. Barilaro told reporters outside the courthouse that the verdict left him feeling “cleared and vindicated.”

“It never centered on money. It pertained to an apology and removal. Now that the campaign has continued, an apology is meaningless. It took a judge to push Google’s hand “said Reuters.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Skip to content