The United States has formally objected to Australia's proposal to allow social media users to opt out of algorithmic feeds, contending in an official embassy submission that the measure amounts to censorship and could harm free expression globally.
Australia's draft Digital Duty of Care framework would require technology companies to offer users the ability to disable algorithms and switch to follower-only feeds as a safeguard against harmful content. According to reporting on the bill, platforms face potential fines of up to A$109 million for failing to comply with the requirements.
In a submission released on 22 September, the US Embassy in Canberra raised what it described as
serious concernsabout the legislation, arguing that permitting the government to
enforce vague definitions of 'harm'would result in
viewpoint-based censorship.
What does the US say about the proposed design?
The Trump administration's objection specifically targeted the technical requirements embedded in Australia's plan. According to reporting on the formal submission, the draft rules would require platforms to notify users and offer a default algorithmic feed with an opt-out to follower-only content. The US statement also warned against
forced chronological feedsor
opt-in recommendation systems, design choices it said could restrict what users encounter online.
The US contended that such mandated platform modifications, particularly when applied to algorithms, would
affect what users see, say, and hear not just in or from Australia, but globally. It also warned that the rules could
reduce the reach of independent journalists or other voices whose content touches on sensitive or controversial topicsif tech firms felt compelled to preemptively demote such material.
How broad is Australia's proposed framework?
The legislation extends beyond social media feeds alone. The draft Digital Duty of Care framework covers social media platforms, AI chatbots, search engines and apps, creating a comprehensive regulatory approach to algorithmic systems. The Australian government has branded the initiative
My Feed, My Way, positioning it as a user-choice measure that allows adults to decide whether their default feed operates algorithmically or displays only content from accounts they follow.
The US Embassy submission urged Australia to consider exempting American social media platforms, a step that would substantially narrow the law's practical scope. The submission also called on Australia to address industry concerns that the
biases and preferencesof government officials do not
disadvantage independent or minority-viewpoint speech.
What is Australia's response to the criticism?
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese rejected characterisations of the legislation as government overreach. Speaking to media in New York on 22 September during his visit to address the UN General Assembly, Albanese stated that
it's not about giving government control. It's about giving people back control over what they receive on their devices.
Albanese framed the proposal as fundamentally about individual agency rather than state authority, emphasising that the measure aims to restore user choice in how they consume online content.
How does this fit into a global trend?
Australia's approach mirrors regulatory action taken elsewhere. The European Union's Digital Services Act, which entered force in 2024, has already required platforms to offer users the option of switching off profiling, establishing a precedent for algorithmic choice at scale. Australia's proposal builds on this model while adapting it to the country's regulatory environment.
The US criticism arrives as the Trump administration has taken a notably different stance on artificial intelligence regulation. During his speech at the UN General Assembly, US President Donald Trump downplayed concerns about AI risks, rejected proposals for guardrails on the technology, and argued it should be renamed
super intelligencebecause
the use of the word artificial makes it sound fake.
What prompted Australia to pursue this legislation?
The algorithm opt-out proposal comes less than a year after Australia introduced a social media ban for children under 16 in December 2025, reflecting the government's broader commitment to protecting young people from online harms. The new framework represents an evolution in that policy direction, extending protections to adult users through choice rather than prohibition.
What happens next?
Australia's Parliament is set to consider the legislation following the draft's introduction for consultation on 8 September, though the exact passage timetable remains open. The government has indicated that platforms would need to implement the notification and opt-out system if the bill advances, making industry consultation and parliamentary scrutiny the next major steps in the process.
