Australia's federal government is set to introduce draft legislation this week that would require social media platforms to give users the option to turn off the recommendation algorithms that shape their feeds. Communications Minister Anika Wells, who last year led Australia's world-first ban on social media access for under-16s, framed the move as a "digital duty of care" — placing legal obligations on tech companies including Meta, Google and TikTok to offer basic safety standards to their users. Platforms that fail to comply could face fines exceeding A$100 million.

Under the proposed legislation, users would be able to opt out of algorithmic content feeds — the automated systems that decide what posts, videos and adverts appear in front of them — likely via a pop-up prompt. The bill is also expected to require platforms to actively identify and manage risks on their services, and to prevent harmful content such as illegal pornography and material promoting disordered eating from being shared. For users under 18, the legislation would target around half a dozen additional areas of so-called psycho-social harm, including content related to body image and online bullying. Wells was careful to frame the measure not as state censorship but as consumer empowerment: "We think that Big Tech should offer them the choice in the first place, and they should respect that choice."

The proposal has drawn criticism from the opposition, with Liberal Party leader Angus Taylor describing himself as "deeply sceptical" and warning that the measure could amount to government censorship of online speech. Some opposition figures have, however, expressed support for the principle. The government has also faced questions about the effectiveness of its existing social media age ban — data published last month showed that most Australian under-16s who used platforms before the December ban continue to do so, and no tech firm has yet been fined for non-compliance.

Experts welcome the direction of the legislation but flag significant practical hurdles. A single platform like Instagram, for example, uses multiple distinct algorithms for its main feed, its Stories and its Reels features, raising questions about what "switching off the algorithm" would actually mean in practice. Analysts also note that most users are unlikely to opt out voluntarily, and argue that a more effective approach might be to make chronological feeds the default, requiring users to actively opt in to algorithmic curation. There are also concerns that fines set at a fixed amount, rather than as a percentage of a company's Australian revenue, may be too small to deter the world's largest tech firms.

The new bill is separate from parallel legislation aimed at toughening enforcement of the existing under-16 social media ban. Taken together, Australia's approach represents one of the most assertive regulatory pushes against platform algorithms in the world — a trend also emerging in the United Kingdom, France and across the European Union. What will matter most, experts say, is whether the final law includes robust transparency requirements that force platforms to demonstrate how they are actually complying, rather than simply taking their word for it.