Australia Moves to Give Social Media Users an ‘Algorithm Off Switch’
Australia has introduced new legislation to parliament this week that would force social media platforms to give users an “off switch” for the recommendation algorithms that curate their feeds — a response, the government says, to mounting evidence that these systems can trap vulnerable users in harmful content loops.
Varsha Yajman knows that trap well. She joined social media at 13, already self-conscious about her appearance, and found her feeds flooded with unrealistic workout videos, dangerous calorie-challenge invitations from strangers, and users competing over how little they weighed or how often they’d been hospitalised. Each night she fell asleep watching someone online diarise everything they’d eaten that day. “I was like, ‘I don’t need to eat. I can just watch other people eat’,” she tells the BBC. Now 24 and recovering from anorexia, Yajman says weight-loss content still reaches her despite every safety setting enabled and an extensive list of banned words.
The centrepiece of the government’s reform package is a mandatory algorithm switch that would let users opt to see only posts from accounts they actually follow, stripping away algorithmic recommendations. Australia says its version is tighter than similar controls tried elsewhere, built to resist being watered down. The package also creates a statutory duty of care for online services. Critics — some who think Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government is overreaching, plus the Trump administration, which calls the rules a free-speech threat — have pushed back.
An algorithmic spiral
Flynn Martin, now diagnosed with bipolar disorder, describes being pulled toward misogynist influencer Andrew Tate and similar figures about four years ago, at 20, when he was insecure and struggling with his mental health. He went viral in Australia for videos including one questioning whether it was acceptable to be a straight white man. “You find yourself in like a bit of an echo chamber… It’s easy to get swept up in that,” the Melbourne resident says, recalling how he came to believe “we were living in this matrix” and that “the only way to break out of it was becoming this alpha male character.” A psychotic episode and hospital stay eventually pulled him out, and he now feels “a bit of empathy for that younger man.”
Neither Martin nor Yajman blames social media alone for their struggles, but both call it a major factor — echoing research linking algorithmic feeds to effects resembling gambling addiction, the spread of disinformation, rising polarisation and even offline violence, with court documents and whistleblowers alleging platforms have known the risks and tolerated them for engagement and revenue.
Activist Chanel Contos, who previously helped reform Australia’s sexual consent education, built the “Fix Our Feeds” campaign around the idea that algorithms should default to off, arguing they are designed to exploit emotion: “it’s going to keep us scrolling.” Her petition drew more than 15,000 signatures and backing from two former prime ministers and multiple MPs, pushing the government toward September’s announcement — though the final policy stops short of making the switch default-off. “This is not about giving government control, it is about giving people control,” Albanese said. “If people want to doom scroll… that’s fine, that’s up to them.”
The switch sits within a broader Digital Duty of Care bill that would require platforms, games and chatbots to keep users reasonably safe, protecting children from material like pornography or content promoting eating disorders, and adults from seriously harmful illegal content, backed by fines of up to A$100m. Communications Minister Anika Wells says the bill “shifts the onus of responsibility from the shoulders of victims onto the shoulders of the big tech operators.” Meta, Snap, TikTok, X and Google have all declined to comment publicly, though Instagram’s Adam Mosseri has argued algorithm-free feeds would mean users see fewer posts from friends and has disputed that his app is addictive — a claim a US jury recently rejected.
Source: BBC News