Australian internet users will be given the choice to stop doom-scrolling and opt out of social media algorithms under sweeping new government reforms.
Draft laws setting up a so-called digital duty of care were introduced by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Tuesday.
As part of the measures, social media companies will need to provide tools for people to choose what they see in their online feeds, under a government initiative called My Feed, My Way.
Under the changes, Aussies will soon be able to choose between a feed selected by an algorithm or one made up of posts from their friends.
‘This is not about giving government control,’ Albanese said on Tuesday.
‘It’s about giving people control. It’s about putting choice back into the hands of Australians online.
‘This isn’t about government decision-making. This is about empowering people. And so, we hope that that produces good outcomes.
‘If people want to doomscroll, as you call it, that’s fine. That’s up to them, but if people want to have a change, then this will provide them with the opportunity.’
Australian internet users will be given the choice to opt out of algorithms under reforms to social media
Social media companies will also be required to protect people from harmful content online.
Harmful content will include the promotion of eating disorders, misogynistic content, pornography and content that glorifies crime.
Companies could face fines of $100million if they don’t enact the duty of care.
Communications Minister Anika Wells said the duty of care would build on the world-leading ban on social media for under-16s.
‘The digital duty of care is not about controlling adults online – it is about giving adults a choice,’ she said.
‘Tech companies can still move fast, but they will no longer be allowed to break things because online harms have real-world consequences.
‘There is a global reckoning coming for big tech.’
It follows government moves to pursue stronger penalties for social media companies as part of measures to bolster the under-16s ban.
Anika Wells (pictured) rejected claims the legislation was about internet censorship
Wells rejected fears the proposals could be used to police political opinions or censor online debate, and insisted the laws are focused on harmful content and user choice.
‘It is about giving people control over what they see online,’ she said.
Wells said the proposed digital duty of care would require technology companies to meet ‘basic safety standards’ and address risks created by their platforms.
‘The focus is on harms caused by systems, tools and features,’ she said.
She said the reforms would target illegal material including child sexual exploitation material, child abuse material, extreme violence, sexual violence, menacing, threatening or harassing conduct, and terrorism and violent extremism material.
‘Aside from illegal content, the reforms are about choice,’ she said.
Under the proposal, users would be able to disable algorithmically recommended feeds and instead see content from accounts they choose to follow.
It would also allow the Communications Minister or eSafety Commissioner to add new categories of online harm, which has been criticised by the Coalition, One Nation and some free-speech advocates.
The laws would allow the government to tackle new tech like Grok as it comes online
Wells said similar powers already exist under Australia’s online safety laws.
‘It was there to include YouTube in the social media laws when I became the Communications Minister. That would have been disallowable in the Senate; nobody disallowed it,’ she said.
She defended the move by raising the concerns earlier this year about AI platform Grok generating sexualised images of minors and unwitting participants.
‘In the first week of January, we were having press conferences about Grok [asking], ‘Can you ban it?’ We didn’t have the power to do that,’ she said.
‘The rule-making power would have allowed me to … consult with the eSafety Commissioner and declare nudifying photos of teenagers in bikinis a new serious harm.’
‘It is on the Coalition if they’re going to disagree with that once they’ve read the exposure draft,’ she said.
‘Is their preference that we recall Parliament every time there’s a new Grok?’
Nationals Leader Matt Canavan slammed the reforms, arguing Labor cannot be trusted with greater powers to regulate what Australians see online.
‘Labor can’t be trusted to regulate the internet,’ he said.
Canavan accused the government of seeking censorship powers under the guise of online safety measures.
‘We should never give censorship powers to people who are proven liars,’ he said.
‘Labor’s own statements prove that their goal here is to censor people, not protect people.’
He said the government was targeting social media and algorithms instead of dealing with the cost-of-living pressures facing Australians.
‘Rather than trying to rig the algorithm, the government should focus on fixing the problems of too high prices, too much tax and too much migration,’ Canavan said.
Join the discussion
Should the government decide what counts as harmful content or should users have total control online?
