In determining the questions of jurisdiction and choice of law in defamation cases, Australian law focuses on the location of ‘publication’. Such an approach is associated with the risk of an unsuitably wide reach of Australian jurisdiction and laws. Through the application of a six-step model, outlining the sequence of events potentially resulting in harm in cases of defamation, this article examines the possibility of focusing on some other location. Advantages and disadvantages of each identified step are discussed. The conclusion reached is that, despite the problems associated with the Australian approach, no better focal point exists. However, the article also concludes that there is a range of avenues for addressing and minimising the problems associated with the Australian approach.