there exists persons with whom the plaintiff has a reputation that occasions an actionable defamation. It is not defamatory, as such, merely to compile a statement that, if it were ever published, would be defamatory. 104 Thus, a book that is printed and distributed to booksellers, but withdrawn before any person is able to purchase and/or read the book, cannot give rise to damage to reputation or an action in defamation. For the foregoing example, I leave aside as trivial, the publication of the manuscript to the publisher, or proof-readers, or, to the extent that it was read by them, to any person involved in the printing of the book. 105 Applying the foregoing principle to the issue of the public Facebook page, it is not the compiler of a comment that publishes as a result of her or his authorship. It is the publisher of a comment in a comprehensible form or legible form that publishes the comment. The difficulty therein arises as a result of the circumstance that the third-party commentator, who has compiled the comment, publishes it by loading it onto the public Facebook page, which is comprehensible because the media company has rendered it relevantly public. 106 Thus, if an author of a comment, which is defamatory, were to post that comment on a public Facebook page, publication occurs by virtue of the fact that the owner of the public Facebook page allows access to the comment by the publication of the page and allows access by other third-party users to the comments on the page. 107 It is necessary to deal with a number of authorities that have dealt with the publishers of search engines and Facebook pages. The defendants seek to draw comfort from the comments of McCallum J (as her Honour then was) in Bleyer v Google Inc (2014) 88 NSWLR 670; [2014] NSWSC 897, in which her Honour deals with the principles adumbrated by Hunt J in Urbanchich v Drummoyne Municipal Council (1991) Aust Torts Reports 81 – 127; (1998) A Def R 50-035 (Supreme Court (NSW), Hunt J, 22 December 1988, unrep). 108 As may be obvious from the title of the judgment delivered by her Honour, the plaintiff was seeking damages for defamation against Google Inc, the U.S. company providing a search engine, known as Google, for the results of a search, the results of which Google provided to (for the purposes of the