Minister rejects censorship claim in algorithm opt-out
People will be empowered to limit algorithms’ influence under draft laws, but the changes could struggle to pass the upper house.
Albanese government ministers are comparing opposition to internet users taking control of social media algorithms to protesting the introduction of seatbelts, as a battle brews in Canberra.
In coming days, the federal government will unveil legislation that would allow people to opt out of algorithms dictated by social media giants.
But the plan has already been criticised by the Coalition, which has called the idea overreach and said it could amount to censorship.
Health Minister Mark Butler said the change was crucial to keeping people safe online.
“The idea is that this is some censorship or infringement of civil liberties almost harks back to the days of the 1970s when people were protesting about seatbelts being introduced to cars,” he told ABC Radio on Monday.
“It’s pretty unremarkable really to expect that big companies have a duty of care not to harm Australian citizens, particularly, frankly, young Australians.”
You might like
Communications Minister Anika Wells said people online needed greater control over what they saw on their social media feeds.
“We want to hold big tech to account. We want them to observe the same basic safety standards, particularly for our children,” she told ABC TV.
“If you walk down the toy aisle in Big W and you see plastic toys, electronic toys and iPads, you want all of those manufacturers to have abided by basic safety standards when they’re selling something to our kids, and that’s what big tech should have.”
The Greens said they were awaiting the draft legislation before deciding their approach. But leader Senator Sarah Hanson-Young has proposed her own bill, calling for an algorithm opt-out to be the default setting.
Deputy Opposition Leader Jane Hume said the proposal could give too much power to the relevant minister.
“We don’t feel that the minister should have the powers to determine what is and is not online harm,” she told ABC TV.
Stay informed, daily
“You could understand why there would be a natural suspicion. When the government tries to control the internet, it inevitably fails.”
Wells is also ramping up a push to get tougher rules for a social media ban for under-16s through the parliament.
While tech giants have introduced various age-verification measures to comply with the policy, they have been widely criticised as ineffective and easy for teens to skirt.
Under the proposed amendments, tech companies could be fined up to $109.2 million for breaching the laws. That would double the current maximum penalty of $54.6 million after it was already slightly increased in July.
The changes would give eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant increased powers to investigate non-compliance after she complained of “thin scaffolding” and limited means of remedy for policy breaches.
More than five million Australian accounts had been removed or deactivated, but about 80 per cent of teenagers younger than 16 were still using social media after the December ban, according to research released in June.
The amendment, introduced in early July, was referred to an inquiry by the Greens and the Coalition into concerns about its strength. Committee members ultimately recommended the bill pass but raised concerns about the government’s approach.
Wells said the delay caused by the inquiry had given social media giants a head start.
“They’ve given big tech eight weeks to prepare. The Coalition and the Greens should pass these laws,” she said.
“Australian parents are relying on the parliament to look after their kids online. This is a way we can give the eSafety commissioner a better way to do that, and we should have done it eight weeks ago.”
-with AAP
Want to see more stories from InDaily Qld in your Google search results?
- Click here to set InDaily Qld as a preferred source.
- Tick the box next to "InDaily Qld". That's it.
