social media

Australia's Consumer and Competition Commission has sued two companies within Meta, the parent group of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp over crypto-ads by celebrities. The companies are Meta Platforms, Inc. and Meta Platforms Ireland Limited

The action is intended to establish that social media and other platforms are responsible for what appears there, something that all social media - and even online versions of established media have long fought against.

Hotels.Com already allows cancellation of bookings without penalty in many of the properties it advertises. But the unprecedented range of restrictions being placed on travellers, often at short notice, means that contracts are, to all intents and purposes, being frustrated by operation of law. It's not, in strict terms, force majeur although many are calling it that or, even, an Act of God. No, it's not that either.

Hotels.com has produced an excellent analysis of exactly what the US blockade of travellers from some parts of the EU means. The notice addresses many of the misconceptions and false arguments that are popular on much social media.

New professional standards for barristers in England and Wales - are they a reminder of long-established principles or a gag?

It all sounds as if it's tailor made for cynics: a government looks at high-growth companies using what it terms "non-traditional data" (which turns out to be social media comment about and by the company and the companies's own websites) and uses it to predict what industries and what regions may thrive. And cynics would be right: social media comment tends to be polarised and out of balance and websites are, of course, the bearers of good tidings. So what's going on?

When we launched PleaseBeInformed.com, one of our fundamental principles of design was that only those who we had taken reasonable steps to identify and verify would be permitted to post, even to comment. That decision was at the heart of our plan to charge a small annual membership fee, paid by credit card. While American-based social media networks spread across the world with more and more fraudulent accounts, China, it is reported, is taking steps to combat the use of social media for financial and "news" fraud, for that is what fake news and scurrilous social media comment is, at their heart.

As if being accused of risking perverting the course of justice (and giving Australian police the virtual finger) isn't enough (story) Facebook has now caused even more annoyance by refusing to remove a page that identifies operational undercover assets in Victoria.

After half-a-a decade of widespread criticism of China for the controls it has placed on the use of the internet including access to material that, in the opinion of the Chinese government, undermines the authority of the government and courts, Australia is wondering how to achieve the same result without incurring the ire of millions and the ridicule of the global community.

A US Judicial Conference Committee has updated the model set of jury instructions federal judges use to deter jurors from using social media to research or communicate about cases on which they serve. The new guidelines provide detailed explanations of the consequences of social media use during a trial, along with recommendations for repeated reminders of the ban on social media usage.