Nine in ten Australians back platform safety laws as bill lands

By James Dore · 2026-09-13

The numbers

Ninety-three percent of Australian voters think online platforms should be legally required to provide a safe environment and prevent harmful content, with 61% strongly agreeing and only 4% disagreeing.^[1] YouGov ran the poll across 1,042 voters online between 4 and 8 September 2026, weighted by age, gender, region, education, household income and past vote.^[5]

The appetite for enforcement runs well beyond disclosure requirements. Eighty-three percent of respondents want platforms that facilitate dangerous content to be fined.^[1] Half go further, backing both company fines and executive jail time together.^[1] Seventy-two percent support individuals being able to seek compensation from a platform for physical or mental harm caused by online content, with only 12% opposed.^[1]

Josh Bornstein, Director of Corporate Regulation at The Australia Institute, said the poll reflected a broader shift in public sentiment. "The tide has turned against Big Tech companies and the enormous harm that they cause," Bornstein said.^[1]

Where the legislation stands

The poll did not land in a vacuum. The government committed to legislating a duty of care on 14 April 2026, accepting a recommendation from the Independent Statutory Review of the Online Safety Act 2021, which said platforms should be required to exercise due diligence and prevent foreseeable harms.^[4] An issues paper followed on 26 May 2026.^[2]

The exposure draft of the Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill 2026 dropped on 8 September 2026, two days before the poll published.^[3] The window for industry to shape the bill closes on 22 September 2026.^[3] Fourteen days of consultation, and the clock is already running.

Communications Minister Anika Wells confirmed the government's intent to move the bill through parliament this year, describing it as the bigger piece of work.^[6] The YouGov data gives the government a clean political read ahead of that vote: opposition to the policy barely registers.

What the law would actually require

For anyone running paid media, the bill's implications go well beyond content moderation. Platforms covered by the legislation would be required to implement risk-assessment systems, monitor for illegal and harmful content, and report repeated serious breaches to the eSafety Commissioner.^[4] For advertisers, that means tighter content adjacency controls and greater scrutiny of how targeting data links audience segments to harmful material.

The proposed framework was developed under the Online Safety Act 2021, drawing on consultation held in late 2025 and early 2026, and it shifts legal responsibility for foreseeable harm from individual users to the platforms themselves.^[2] That is a structural change in liability, and the ad industry sits squarely inside it.

Civil liberties groups have not been quiet. Critics of the eSafety regime, including Electronic Frontiers Australia, have raised consistent concerns about the powers the existing Online Safety Act already grants the Commissioner: removal notices issued without prior judicial oversight, extraterritorial orders aimed at content and people outside Australia, and the chilling effect on lawful speech and small publishers. A duty-of-care framework that adds mandatory risk-assessment obligations and the prospect of executive criminal liability will sharpen those concerns. Verifying age to protect users from harm also means identifying everyone who uses a platform, a trade-off the bill's supporters have not yet publicly resolved.

The feedback deadline of 22 September 2026 is the last formal moment for platforms, agencies and publishers to put their arguments on the record before the bill moves to parliament.

James Dore

James Dore is Strategy Director at Bushnote, a leader in SEO and AEO in Australia. He writes on search, AI and the technology decisions shaping government and industry.