The Australia algorithm opt-out law took its first parliamentary step on Thursday, October 15, 2026, when the government introduced a bill that would require social media platforms to let users switch off algorithm-driven recommendations. According to Anadolu Agency, the Digital Duty of Care Bill 2026 was introduced in the House of Representatives and must pass both houses, including the Senate, before it becomes law. Users would choose between a personalised feed and one showing only accounts they follow, as part of wider rules that make companies responsible for preventing online harm.
What the Australia Algorithm Opt-Out Law Would Let Users Do
The headline feature, which the government calls “My Feed, My Way,” would give Australians aged over 16 a choice between algorithmically recommended content as their main feed and a feed of accounts they follow. Earlier drafts described regular pop-up messages asking users which they prefer, and the government has said the choice must be respected by platforms. Communications Minister Anika Wells has said many Australians like their algorithms, and that the aim is to give people the choice rather than remove personalised feeds.
The rules would apply beyond social media to gaming services, apps and AI chatbots, with minimum safety standards for all. Professional news content and entertainment media would be exempt. For users under 18, platforms would have to protect against harmful material such as content promoting eating disorders, dangerous stunts, criminal behaviour and hostility toward women, according to Anadolu. An earlier draft also proposed switching off personalised algorithms and endless scrolling for under-16s, though the bill’s final wording on that point has not been confirmed in the reports reviewed.
How the Law Would Be Enforced
Enforcement would sit largely with Australia’s eSafety Commissioner. Under the bill, the commissioner would be able to remove AI-powered “nudification” services, and response deadlines for cyberbullying and online abuse complaints would drop from 48 hours to 24 hours. Companies that break the rules could face penalties of up to A$109.2 million (about US$75 million), according to Anadolu.
Several outlets describe the broader duty as one that requires platforms to prevent foreseeable harms proactively rather than react after they occur. Wells compared the idea to the basic safety standards that already apply to food, cars and children’s toys. Critics, though, have questioned whether the fines are large enough, and how regulators will check that an opt-out is genuine rather than hidden behind confusing menus.
Why It Is Politically Contested
The bill’s path through parliament is not straightforward. The Coalition opposition said in September that it would not support an earlier draft, with leader Angus Taylor calling it a “political censorship bill” and objecting to the powers it gave the minister and the commissioner. The Nightly reported that Wells revised the draft after criticism that it left too much power with the minister, and that she has said the bill is not a stepping stone for regulating misinformation.
The Greens, whose votes Labor is likely to need in the Senate, have not ruled out support but want a tougher bill. They have called for larger fines, a right for individuals to sue platforms over online harm, and an opt-in default, which would mean users have to actively choose algorithmic feeds. Reports say the Greens and Coalition have pushed for a Senate inquiry reporting by November 20, ahead of the final sitting week in late November. The US government has also criticised the proposal, calling it online censorship and urging that American platforms be exempted.
Privacy Questions Around the Australia Algorithm Opt-Out Law
The reports reviewed do not explain how the opt-out would affect the personal data that platforms collect. A following-only feed relies less on profiling to rank content, but that does not by itself show that platforms would stop collecting or using data about users’ behaviour. One report noted that the European Union’s Digital Services Act already requires large platforms to offer an option that does not rely on profiling-based recommendations, which gives regulators a model to compare against.
Other privacy questions depend on the bill’s detailed text, including how platforms would confirm users’ ages and how much information the regulator could demand from companies. Until the full bill and any Senate committee findings are examined, these remain open questions rather than established problems.
What Happens Next
The bill is likely to face a Senate inquiry before it returns for debate in the final sitting weeks of the year. Labor will need to win over either the Greens or the Coalition, and changes to fines, user rights and ministerial powers are possible along the way. Even if passed, rules like these would take time to roll out, so the opt-out would not appear on users’ phones immediately. For further updates on this story and other developing issues, follow the latest reporting from Human Crisis News.