Australia has introduced legislation that could require social media platforms to give users a choice between algorithmically recommended content and feeds showing posts from accounts they follow. The proposal forms part of the government’s Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill 2026 and its “My Feed, My Way” initiative. The legislation aims to give Australians more control over the content they encounter online, while placing broader responsibilities on digital platforms to address safety risks.
The Australian government introduced the bill to Parliament on October 15, 2026, as it seeks to strengthen online safety requirements for social media services and other digital platforms. Under the proposed feed-choice framework, users would be able to select a following-only feed instead of relying on personalised recommendations. The initiative is not yet an implemented requirement: the legislation must progress through Parliament, while a separate consultation is examining the rules needed to put the feed-choice system into effect.
Key Takeaways
- New legislation: Australia has introduced the Digital Duty of Care Bill 2026, which includes a framework for giving users greater control over social media feeds.
- Algorithm opt-out: Platforms could be required to let users choose a feed containing posts only from accounts they follow.
- User choice: The government’s “My Feed, My Way” initiative is designed to let users change their preference rather than accept a permanent default.
- Broader online safety: The bill also addresses harmful content and features across online services, including apps, games and AI chatbots.
- Consultation deadline: Public submissions on the proposed feed-choice rules are due by November 5, 2026.
- Not yet in force: The bill and supporting regulatory instrument still need to complete the relevant processes.
What Is Australia’s New Social Media Algorithm Bill?
The proposal is part of a broader effort by the Australian government to make online platforms more accountable for the risks their products can create.
The Digital Duty of Care Bill 2026 would establish obligations for online services to take reasonable steps to protect users from serious online harms. It also creates a route for the communications minister to introduce rules requiring specified services to provide tools that allow users to manage certain platform features.
One of those tools is the ability to choose how a social media feed is populated.
Under the government’s “My Feed, My Way” initiative, logged-in Australian users would be offered a choice between algorithmically recommended content and a feed limited to posts from accounts they follow. The stated objective is to give users more control over their online experience without prohibiting recommendation algorithms altogether.
The distinction is important. Australia is not proposing to eliminate personalised feeds across social media. Instead, the proposal would require platforms to offer an alternative and respect the user’s selection.
The initiative also sits within a larger regulatory package covering online safety, meaning the bill’s implications extend beyond feed design.
How Would an Algorithm-Free Social Media Feed Work?
Most major social media platforms use recommendation systems to decide which posts appear prominently in a user’s feed. These systems can consider factors such as past interactions, viewing behaviour, content preferences, popularity and predicted interest.
A personalised feed can introduce users to creators, discussions and information outside the accounts they already follow. However, it can also prioritise material selected by a platform’s recommendation system rather than content users have deliberately chosen to see.
A following-only feed would work differently. Instead of relying on algorithmic recommendations to determine what appears, it would primarily show posts from accounts the user has chosen to follow.
| Feature | Algorithmically recommended feed | Following-only feed |
|---|---|---|
| Main source of content | Platform recommendations and user activity | Accounts the user follows |
| Content discovery | Can recommend unfamiliar accounts and posts | More closely tied to selected accounts |
| Personalisation | Uses recommendation systems | Focuses on the user’s following list |
| User control | Depends on platform settings | Intended to provide a clear alternative |
| Proposed Australian framework | Would remain available | Users would be offered a choice |
The government’s plan also emphasises that users should be able to change their selection. Communications Minister Anika Wells has described the approach as giving Australians an ongoing choice about their primary feed.
The practical experience will depend on the final rules and how platforms implement them. Details such as how the choice is presented, how easily it can be changed and which services are covered will be important to the effectiveness of the policy.
Why Does Australia Want Users to Control Their Feeds?
Recommendation algorithms have become central to the way people discover information and entertainment online. They can help users find relevant material, but critics argue that the systems can also amplify harmful content or encourage excessive engagement.
The Australian government has linked its broader online-safety reforms to concerns about the effects of harmful content and platform design, particularly on young people.
A feed-choice requirement would address one part of that debate by giving users an alternative to personalised recommendations. Instead of depending entirely on a platform’s default settings, users could decide whether they want the system to recommend content or would prefer to see posts from selected accounts.
The proposal reflects a wider international discussion about the influence of recommendation systems on online experiences. Policymakers are examining how platforms rank content, how users can control those systems and whether existing transparency and safety measures are sufficient.
However, choosing a following-only feed would not remove every risk associated with social media. Users could still encounter harmful material posted by accounts they follow, and a chronological or following-only feed would not necessarily prevent all forms of manipulation or harassment.
The policy is therefore one component of a wider regulatory approach rather than a complete solution to online safety.
What Is the Digital Duty of Care Bill 2026?
The feed-choice proposal is only one part of the Digital Duty of Care Bill.
The broader legislation aims to require online services to take reasonable steps to protect Australians from seriously harmful content and features. The proposed framework covers a wider range of digital services, including social platforms, games, applications and AI chatbots.
The government has also outlined obligations intended to protect under-18s from specified harmful content and features. These include material linked to eating disorders, serious mental distress, dangerous stunts and other categories identified in the legislation.
The bill would strengthen the role of online safety regulation by placing greater responsibility on service providers to identify and reduce foreseeable risks, rather than relying solely on action after harm occurs.
The exact obligations will depend on the final legislation and associated rules. Different types of services may face different requirements depending on their functions and the risks they present.
For social media companies, the proposed framework could mean changes to feed settings, user notifications, safety assessments and internal compliance processes. For other online services, the impact will depend on which provisions apply to them.
When Could the New Rules Take Effect?
The legislation is not yet in force. Introducing a bill is an important legislative step, but it does not by itself create an immediate obligation for every social media platform to offer an algorithm opt-out.
The government is also consulting on a proposed legislative instrument that would give effect to the “My Feed, My Way” initiative. Public feedback is due by 11.59 pm Australian Eastern Daylight Time on November 5, 2026.
The consultation is intended to help shape how the feed-choice requirement will operate. The proposed framework relies on the bill providing the necessary authority for the communications minister to establish the rules.
The final timeline will depend on the parliamentary process and the subsequent regulatory steps. Until those processes are completed, users should not assume that the proposed choice is already available across all social media services in Australia.
The consultation is also an opportunity for platforms, consumer groups, researchers and members of the public to comment on how the choice should work in practice.
How Could the Proposal Affect Meta, TikTok and X?
If implemented as proposed, the policy could require covered platforms to provide Australian users with an accessible way to choose a following-only feed.
For services such as Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and X, this could affect how feed preferences are presented and how users switch between recommendation-driven and following-based content.
Platforms may need to review their existing controls and ensure that the alternative feed is easy to find and use. The government has said it wants the choice to be genuine and enduring, rather than a setting that users must repeatedly search for or reselect.
The proposal does not mean that these platforms would have to abandon recommendation algorithms. Users who prefer personalised content would still be able to choose it under the planned approach.
The commercial implications are less certain. Recommendation systems can influence how long users spend on a platform and which content receives attention. If a significant number of users select following-only feeds, content discovery and engagement patterns could change.
However, the eventual effect will depend on adoption rates, the final rules, platform design and whether users prefer the alternative once it becomes available.
What Are the Main Concerns and Challenges?
One challenge is ensuring that the alternative feed is genuinely usable. If a platform makes the option difficult to find or gives it a substantially reduced feature set, users may not receive the meaningful choice the policy is intended to provide.
Another issue is balancing user autonomy with the benefits of recommendation systems. Algorithms can help users discover smaller creators, local businesses, educational material and interests they might not otherwise encounter. A following-only feed could reduce some of that discovery, even as it gives users greater control over what appears.
There are also questions about implementation. Platforms will need clear rules about how the preference is displayed, how often users can change it and which services must comply. Regulators will need a way to assess whether companies meet those requirements.
Finally, a feed-choice rule cannot replace wider safeguards against illegal or seriously harmful content. The government’s broader Digital Duty of Care framework is intended to address those issues separately.
The outcome will depend not just on the wording of the legislation but also on the practical design of the controls and how consistently the rules are enforced.
The Bigger Picture
Australia’s proposal reflects a shift in online regulation towards giving users more direct control over the systems that shape their digital experiences. Rather than banning recommendation algorithms, the government wants covered platforms to offer a clear alternative that prioritises content from accounts users deliberately follow. If implemented effectively, the approach could change how Australians discover information, follow creators and interact with social media.
The proposal remains part of a wider legislative process, and important implementation details are still being considered. Platforms, regulators and users will have to work through questions about accessibility, user choice, content discovery and enforcement. The long-term impact will depend on whether Australians adopt following-only feeds and how platforms adapt their products to the final requirements.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What is Australia’s social media algorithm opt-out proposal?
It is part of the Digital Duty of Care Bill 2026 and the government’s “My Feed, My Way” initiative. It would require covered social media services to let users choose between algorithmically recommended content and a feed limited to accounts they follow.
2. Will Australia ban social media algorithms?
No. The proposal is designed to give users a choice, not eliminate recommendation algorithms. Users would be able to continue using personalised feeds if they prefer them.
3. Which social media platforms could be affected?
The requirement is intended for specified social media services used by Australians. The final coverage will depend on the legislation and supporting rules.
4. When will users be able to turn off algorithmic feeds?
There is no confirmed implementation date yet. The bill must progress through Parliament, and the government is consulting on the proposed rules. Public submissions on the draft instrument are due November 5, 2026.
5. Will a following-only feed make social media completely safe?
No. It could give users greater control over recommendations, but users may still encounter harmful material from accounts they follow. The wider Digital Duty of Care framework addresses other online-safety risks.
6. Why is Australia introducing these rules?
The government says the initiative is intended to give users more control over their feeds as part of a broader effort to make online services more accountable for safety risks.
Get the day’s top stories in your inbox
One concise email. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
