Australia Proposes 'Digital Duty of Care' to Curb Social Media Algorithms

The Australian Labor government is planning to introduce "digital duty of care" legislation that would require social media platforms to give users direct control over their algorithmic feeds. The move represents a significant shift in regulatory strategy, moving the responsibility for risk management from the individual user to the platform provider.

Under the proposed laws, social media companies must implement pop-up notifications allowing users to opt out of recommender algorithms. Beyond curation control, the legislation imposes a legal obligation on platforms to identify and manage systemic risks and actively prevent the distribution of harmful content, such as illegal pornography. For users under the age of 18, the government intends to expand these protections by identifying roughly half a dozen additional categories of "psycho-social harm," specifically targeting content related to bullying and body image. To ensure compliance, the government has proposed steep financial penalties, with fines for breaches potentially exceeding A$100 million.

Regulatory Context

This legislative push arrives as part of a broader global trend toward stricter oversight of Big Tech. It runs parallel to, but remains legally distinct from, the Online Safety Amendment (Strengthening Enforcement for the Social Media Minimum Age) Bill, which focuses on implementing a social media ban for children under 16. By separating the age ban from the duty of care laws, the government is creating a two-pronged approach: restricting access for the youngest users while fundamentally altering the operational requirements for those who remain on these platforms.

Industry Implications

If enacted, this would be one of the first major legislative attempts worldwide to dismantle the "rabbit hole" effect created by recommender systems. By allowing users to bypass algorithmic curation, the law seeks to reduce the involuntary consumption of extreme or harmful content. However, the proposal has raised technical and economic questions. Experts have questioned the feasibility of a universal "opt-out" mechanism across diverse platform architectures—such as the differing algorithms used for Reels versus Stories. Furthermore, there is ongoing debate regarding whether flat fines of A$100 million are sufficient to deter trillion-dollar technology giants.

What's Next

As the government moves toward formalizing the legislation, the focus will shift to how "psycho-social harm" is defined and measured for minors. Opposition Leader Angus Taylor has signaled support for the principle of user agency, stating that while many Australians may prefer algorithms, "Big Tech should offer them the choice in the first place, and they should respect that choice." The industry now awaits the specific technical standards the government will require for the opt-out notifications and the precise criteria for risk management compliance.