All news articlesNMC RESEARCH
CategoryTECHMedia
RegionsAUUSAWORLD
ContinentsNorth America
TopicsMedia
AI-generated editorial illustration based on the published article topic; not a documentary photograph.

Australia proposes a lasting choice between recommended and following-only feeds

Loading statistics…

A proposed feed choice would have to remain in place unless users changed it. The wider online safety bill must pass before the draft rule can take effect.

Review information is loading.

Australia’s government introduced an online safety bill on 15 October that could lead to social media users being offered a lasting alternative to recommendation-driven feeds. The bill is not yet law, and the detailed requirement for a feed showing posts from followed accounts sits in a separate draft rule that could be made only after the bill receives royal assent. [2] [4] [6]

Communications Minister Anika Wells says the plan would give Australians over 16 a choice between recommended content and a main feed drawn from accounts they follow. Under the draft rule, a logged-in user who has not chosen a preferred feed would be prompted to do so. Platforms would have to keep that setting unless the user explicitly changed it, and could not make the alternative feed harder to use. Recommendations would not be switched off by default. [3] [4]

The proposed switch is narrower than an end to algorithms altogether. The draft defines the alternative feed by where its content comes from; it does not expressly rule out algorithmic ordering of posts from followed accounts. It would also allow adverts from accounts a user does not follow. [3]

The BBC reported that Varsha Yajman, who is recovering from anorexia, says she still sees weight-loss content despite using social media safety settings. It also reported that some existing feed controls revert when users leave an app — a practice the Australian draft seeks to prevent. [1] [3]

The wider bill would introduce safety duties for online services including games, apps and AI chatbots. The government says it is intended to protect under-18s from harmful content and features, while setting a narrower standard concerning seriously harmful material and conduct for adults. [4]

Australia’s opposition Coalition objects to the bill, warning that vague definitions of harm could restrict free speech. Wells says the government has removed a proposed ministerial power to define new harms and added an exemption for professional news material. Public consultation on the feed rule is open until 5 November; both the bill’s passage and the final form of the rule remain undecided. [2] [5] [6]

Sign in to give this article a thumbs up or down.

About this discussion and AI questions

Private test discussion. Comments are readers’ views and are not yet automatically fact-checked. Editing is available for 60 seconds after posting.

Sign in with a confirmed reader account and choose a username to read comments and participate.

Sorting applies to top-level comments; replies remain oldest first. New comments and likes can change the order. Refresh for the current ranking.

Loading comments…