Australians' feeds could get an algorithm off switch

What the bill requires

Communications Minister Anika Wells introduced the Digital Duty of Care bill to federal parliament on 15 October 2026, setting minimum safety standards across social media platforms, apps, games and artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots.^[1] The centrepiece provision requires those services to let users opt out of an algorithmic feed. Users who want to keep their algorithm can do so.^[1]

The bill landed the same week Meta rolled out its "Your Algorithm" controls on Facebook, a set of tuning dials that adjust recommendation weighting but do not switch the algorithm off. That gap between a dial and an off-switch is precisely what the bill targets. The September exposure draft set a maximum civil penalty of 60,000 penalty units for breaching the duty of care,^[2] and the government's proposed fines have been reported at more than $100 million.^[3]

The bill also requires platforms to stop under-18s seeing content that glorifies crime or dangerous stunts, promotes eating disorders or is pornographic, as well as content promoting hostile ideas about women and gender equality, and online abuse and bullying.^[1] Wells framed the obligation plainly: "If you build it, you are responsible for its risks. That isn't radical. It is just Australian."^[3]

Changes from the exposure draft

The September 2026 exposure draft proposed ministerial rule-making powers to define new categories of harm. That power drew criticism during the draft stage.^[2] The final bill removes that power entirely. Wells said "we have removed the ministerial rule-making power to define new harms in the final bill", so new harms can only be added by an amendment passed by parliament.^[3]

The final bill also includes a carve-out protecting professional news material, which Wells framed as a safeguard for public-interest journalism.^[1]

The political numbers

The bill faces a difficult path. The Coalition will not back the bill, and the Greens say the Senate will send it to an inquiry and that "key elements" are missing.^[3] The Greens' core objection concerns the fine structure. Greens communications spokesperson Sarah Hanson-Young said on 12 October: "Fines for breaches must be tied to a percentage of global revenue. The proposed fines in the draft legislation are peanuts to these tech companies and will not force them to change their behaviour."^[4]

Wells said she will "keep negotiating in good faith" with the Greens.^[3] With the Coalition opposed and the Greens seeking changes, passage is not assured.

Publishers, brands and agencies

For publishers, the news carve-out is the provision to watch: the duty falls on platforms, and professional news material is protected.^[1] How that carve-out is defined will matter to every newsroom that relies on Facebook, TikTok or YouTube for distribution.

For brands and agencies, the algorithm opt-out provision raises a concrete question about reach. A campaign built on algorithmically extended reach assumes the platform's recommendation engine keeps delivering impressions beyond the followed-account base. If the bill passes, platforms have 12 months to make changes; in the exposure draft, the duty-of-care schedules start 12 months after Royal Assent.^[2] Whether a meaningful share of Australian users actually switches their feeds off is the variable that determines how much of that reach model holds.

Wells also pointed to the under-16 social media ban: "The law is not failing. Platforms are failing to comply with the law."^[3] The next marker is the Senate inquiry, if the chamber sends the bill there.