Australia Targets Big Tech Algorithms With Opt-Out Law

Wells rejected the censorship charge outright. "This isn't about censorship. This is about identifying risks or making big tech identify the risks on their own platform and making big tech mitigate against those risks on their platform," she told Channel Nine. She added that many Australians like their algorithms — "A lot of Australians will want to choose the algorithm" — but that platforms should have to offer and respect the choice. On fines, she was blunt: "I want Big Tech to respect that choice, and if they don't respect that choice, I want Big Tech to suffer big fines."

Liberal Party leader Angus Taylor said he was "highly sceptical," telling News24 he feared the plan was "an attempt by the government to censor social media" and that Labor should first plug the holes in its under-16 ban.

Nationals Leader Matt Canavan went further: "People should be able to freely express their views, and any attempt to silence or gag or influence those by governments should be absolutely rejected in a free and open democratic society." Some other opposition members say they back the idea in principle.

Health Minister Mark Butler compared the pushback to old fights over car safety. "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.

Swinburne University media expert Belinda Barnet backed the change but played down its scale. "It's actually not that radical. It's just kind of a move back in time to before all of these automated, essentially AI algorithms," she told AAP, adding it "is really just removing one of the addictive elements." Barnet favors an opt-in default as the more effective route.