US opposes Australia’s proposed social media restrictions

The Australian government’s plan to require social platforms to give users an algorithm opt-out has been criticized by the U.S. embassy in Canberra, Australia, with U.S. officials saying the proposal could be used to curb free speech, and censor certain perspectives.

Under Australia’s proposed Digital Duty of Care legislation, social media users in the country would be given the option to switch off engagement-based algorithms in social apps. The idea is that this could help to counter negative impacts of content amplification, including overexposure to the most divisive elements of the web. The proposal would also target addictive features in social media apps and AI chatbots. In addition, the bill’s language includes tougher restrictions on content related to eating disorders, crime, gender equality and dangerous stunts.

But the U.S. government has opposed the plan. As reported by BBC, the U.S. embassy in Canberra submitted a response to the proposal, noting that officials had serious concerns about allowing the Australian government to enforce this legislation, which the U.S. embassy said could effectively amount to localized censorship of content and control over U.S.-owned businesses.

The concerns specifically relate to the secondary focus of the approach in restrictions on content linked to harm. Based on the current wording of the Australian government’s discussion document for the policy, the laws would give Australia’s federal minister for communications the power to enact rules relating to the designation of categories and types of harm as covered under the law.

Some have suggested that this means that the sitting government of the day would be able to use this clause to define what is and is not considered harmful, and would therefore be able to censor whatever content it didn’t like on social media apps.  

Though the document does also note that any changes to these regulations would be subject to parliamentary review, and would be tested for compliance with Australia’s human rights obligations, which include freedom of expression.

But U.S. officials have asked for more clarity around how harms and risks will be determined under this approach, and how Australian officials plan to enact any restrictions on what social platforms can allow in their apps.

Interestingly, U.S. officials have also claimed that the proposed laws could pose a threat to independent journalists, particularly those whose content touches on sensitive or controversial topics.

The concept is still in the proposal stage, and Australian officials have not decided on the final structure of the proposal as yet. But the U.S. opposition seemingly reflects broader calls from conservative media to block the bill and stop Australian officials potentially shutting down certain media outlets.

However, that’s not what the proposal is intended to do. It's also interesting that these concerns are being raised in relation to a bill designed to address content related specifically to topics that have been shown to be harmful to social media users.

The opposition seems like a tacit admission that these issues are used by some groups to enhance their own reach, since algorithmic amplification helps to boost controversial, divisive discussions by using engagement as a proxy for audience interest.

Either way, the proposal is still in discussion, and will not be finalized for some time yet.