Australia unveils landmark Bill to let social media users opt out of algorithms

• Australia introduced a bill allowing social media users to opt out of content algorithms, aiming to improve online safety and reduce exposure to harmful content.
• The bill requires platforms to offer an opt-out pop-up and imposes fines up to A$109 million for non-compliance, empowering users to see content only from friends and followers.
• Experts warn of challenges in user uptake and platform resistance but see the law as a crucial step toward reducing social media harms and limiting tech giants' control.

SYDNEY – Australia unveiled a landmark Bill on Sept 8 to let social media users opt out of the algorithms that control content, a move experts hailed as “profound” – and overdue – in improving online safety.

Warning that technology giants face a “global reckoning”, the government said that platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and TikTok would need to offer users the choice to opt out in a pop-up message and will face fines of up to A$109 million (S$99.6 million) if they fail to comply. Users who opt out will see content from friends and people they follow.

Analysts said the draft laws marked a significant milestone in global efforts to limit the exposure of social media users to misinformation, extremist and sexually explicit content, scams, deepfakes, grooming, and content that affects people’s body image. Most experts said an opt-in approach – in which algorithm-generated content was not the default – would have been a better way to tackle the problem but would have been more divisive and led to a fierce backlash from social media giants.

Rashina Hoda, professor of software engineering at Monash University, told The Straits Times that the new laws were “much required” and “if anything, a little late, given the types of harms we have seen on social media for years”. But she expressed concern about how many people will choose to opt out of the algorithm, especially as social media encourages an “inertia” that leaves many users as passive consumers of endless feeds.

“This could have a profound effect and change how we deal with social media and how social media doles this (content) out to us,” she said.

“Social media has made us used to the default settings for decades. If and when we have the control back to opt out, it will be fascinating to know whether people know what to do with that control and how they use it.”

The new opt-out measure is part of a draft Digital Duty of Care Bill that also requires technology firms that operate AI chatbots, search engines, apps and social media platforms to protect children under 18 from harms such as eating disorders, bullying and content that is misogynistic or glorifies crime. Examples cited by the Minister for Communications, Anika Wells, on Sept 8 included a chatbot that advises girls on how to survive on 600 calories a day and platforms with content likening women to “beasts or animals”.

The draft Bill, set to undergo a consultation period, follows Australia’s world-first move in December 2025 to ban children under 16 from having accounts on social media – a move that has been followed by countries around the world, including Indonesia and Malaysia.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who plans to address the United Nations in New York on the changes later in September, told reporters on Sept 8 that the opt-out measure was designed to “empower people” to choose the content they see.

“If people want to doomscroll… that’s up to them,” he said. “But if people want to have a change, then this will provide them with the opportunity.”

Australia’s opt-out plan goes further than a policy the European Union introduced in 2023 that required technology giants to provide an opt-out feature. Analysts say social media platforms found ways around the law, such as making the option difficult to find.

Ellese Ferdinands, a Social Media Specialist at the University of Sydney, told ST that platforms will inevitably try to circumvent Australia’s opt-out measure but supported the new legislation because “we have to start somewhere”. She said the opt-out option could result in a heavy hit on the revenues of technology giants, whose algorithms aim to keep users on platforms for as long as possible to maximise advertising revenue.

Despite her preference for an opt-in measure, Ferdinands said she was confident many people would opt out, citing trends such as “scroll-free Sundays,” when people voluntarily avoid social media on Sundays.

“People who opt out will be less addicted to social media and will spend less time on the app,” she said.

“Over the long term, we could see drops in revenue for the platforms. This has huge implications for their bottom line.”

Asked about the risk that the new laws could cause a rift with Donald Trump over the potential hit to the profits of American technology firms, Albanese said he had a good relationship with the United States President, whom he plans to meet in New York in several weeks, but he believed the curbs on the technology giants were in Australia’s interest.

Albanese acknowledged the move could prompt a backlash from technology firms, saying: “We’re taking power from big global tech companies and giving it to ordinary Australians... It’s the right thing to do.”

Hoda said the government should create an independent body to oversee the opt-out option and introduce an education campaign to promote awareness and encourage users to take control of their content feeds. She said algorithms had led to “relentless” flows of content that were based on users’ personal data and frequently targeted people’s vulnerabilities.

“We can’t rely on social media to self-monitor and self-regulate,” she said. “The algorithm works on profiling and hyper-personalisation of content that is geared to playing with our vulnerabilities… You might start off looking for recipes to make lasagne and end up in some weird corner of the net and wonder, ‘How am I seeing this?’”