Australians may soon choose a non-algorithmic timeline
A proposed Australian law would let users choose between platform recommendations and a timeline showing only followed accounts.
Australia wants to give users more control over how social media platforms compile their timelines. Under a draft Digital Duty of Care, platforms would have to let people choose between a personalised timeline based on algorithms and posts from accounts they follow themselves.
The Australian government has published a bill for consultation. Platforms such as TikTok, Instagram and Facebook would have to send users a notification allowing them to choose between algorithmic recommendations and a timeline without such recommendations.
The proposed choice would apply to users over the age of 16. They would be able to change their preference again later. The government presents the measure as a way to give people more say over their online environment, without banning the use of social media itself.
The plans form part of a broader Digital Duty of Care. Platforms would have to actively limit risks that they could reasonably foresee. For children, these include eating disorders, pornography, misogyny, dangerous stunts and serious mental harm; for adults, the proposal also mentions violence, crime and threats.
According to the public explanatory material, infringements could result in heavy fines. Associated Press cites a maximum of 109.2 million Australian dollars. The precise amounts and their application depend on the final legislation and how the rules are implemented.
The choice between the two timelines is politically contentious. Supporters say recommendation systems keep users engaged for long periods and can amplify harmful content. Platform companies, by contrast, point out that many people find personalised recommendations useful and argue that a chronological or limited timeline may be less appealing.
The proposal is not yet law. The government must incorporate responses from the opposition, the Greens, platforms and civil society organisations before Parliament considers it. With this, Australia is building on earlier rules that are intended to keep children under 16 off major social platforms.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The Australian government has published a draft law for consultation.
- Users could choose a feed showing only followed accounts.
- The proposed duty of care includes measures addressing various online harms.
- The law is not yet final.
Left
Arguments Platforms have been able to design recommendation systems for years without sufficient societal oversight. Users and children deserve protection from addictive design choices and harmful content, even if that limits commercial models.
Values Public health, child protection, digital rights and collective responsibility.
Consequences More obligations could improve safety, but platforms may restrict features or pass on costs.
Centre
Arguments User choice is a workable compromise as long as the government does not decide which opinions people may see. Clear standards, independent enforcement and evaluation are needed to prevent a broad duty of care from being applied arbitrarily.
Values Autonomy, proportionality, transparency and institutional oversight.
Consequences A choice-based model could preserve innovation while limiting risks, but its practical effectiveness has yet to be demonstrated.
Right
Arguments Adult users should be able to decide for themselves which services they use and which feed they choose. The government should protect children from clear harm, but exercise restraint with rules that treat commercial recommendations as inherently suspect.
Values Individual freedom, enterprise, freedom of choice and limited government power.
Consequences Less regulation could support innovation and personalised services, but would leave more responsibility with users and parents.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The proposed choice, the broader duty of care and the status as a draft law have been confirmed by ABC and AP. The text makes clear which elements may still change.
- confirmed Australia wants to let users choose between algorithmic recommendations and content from followed accounts. — ABC and AP describe this proposed choice. source
- confirmed The proposed duty of care could result in fines of more than 100 million Australian dollars. — ABC mentions fines of more than 100 million; AP cites a maximum of 109.2 million dollars. source
- confirmed The rules are still under consultation and still have to go before Parliament. — ABC reports that the government is consulting and that the proposals are not yet final. source
- confirmed Australia already has rules intended to keep children under 16 off major social platforms. — The eSafety Commissioner describes the existing age rules. source
Editor's note
This concerns a draft law under consultation, not regulations that have been introduced. The precise fines, exemptions and technical obligations may still change.Sources
- Labor proposes social media algorithm choice under new digital duty of care — ABC News Australia
- Australian social media users to be offered choice to opt out of algorithms — Associated Press
- Social media age restrictions — eSafety Commissioner Australia
More on this in Dutch media
- AD — „australië sociale media”
- de Volkskrant — „australië sociale media”
- RTL Nieuws — „australië sociale media”