The Australian government is moving to force major platforms to give users a clear choice over algorithmic recommendation systems, and to punish firms that refuse to build that control. Communications Minister Anika Wells said draft digital duty of care laws, due to be introduced in the coming days, will require technology companies to offer a way for people to switch off or opt into recommendation systems, with substantial penalties for non-compliance.
Wells framed the measure as establishing "some basic safety protections on an industry that hasn't had to observe it." She pointed to the government's wider digital agenda, after leading last year's policy to bar under-16s from some services, saying "We want to give Australians more choice over what they see on their social media feeds." The draft will not stop at algorithms; ministers plan further obligations for platforms to remove harmful material, naming illegal pornography and videos that promote disordered eating as examples of content that would face stronger takedown duties.
Crucial design choices remain unsettled. The government will take expert advice on whether users must opt in to algorithmic recommendations or be offered an opt-out, a technical distinction that will shape how many people change their feeds. Officials have signalled they will introduce the bill even while some implementation details are still being advised, beginning a parliamentary process that will test the policy's practical reach.
Opposition figures have already signalled resistance. Liberal leader Angus Taylor said he is "highly sceptical" and warned the change could become "an attempt by the government to censor social media." Some opposition members voiced qualified support for the principle of user choice but urged tighter drafting to protect freedom of expression. Those concerns will be a live part of debate, as will practical queries about how regulators will verify compliance and how penalties would be applied.
The government's enforcement record will shape how seriously industry treats the new rules, critics note. No company has yet been fined for failing to enforce the under-16 measures, and research cited by lawmakers suggests many young users who were on platforms before that ban remain active. With the draft bill imminent, the next phase is technical and political: advisers will settle opt-in or opt-out mechanics, regulators will sketch verification processes, and Parliament will decide how far to trade safety obligations against free-speech limits during the bill's passage.
