Australia Defends Proposed Social Media Algorithm Laws Against US Censorship Claims

The Australian government is pushing back against criticism from the United States after the Trump administration warned that Australia's draft "digital duty of care" legislation amounts to "censorship of protected speech".

The diplomatic friction centers on proposed rules by Australia's Labor government that would require social media platforms to give users the option to turn off personalized algorithms. Under the draft legislation, tech companies risk heavy financial penalties if they fail to provide an opt-out choice, allowing individuals to default to a feed showing only posts from accounts they actively follow.

In a rare formal submission to the public consultation process, the US embassy in Canberra expressed "serious concerns" over the measures. Washington warned that allowing Australian regulators to "enforce vague definitions of 'harm'" could lead to "viewpoint-based censorship" by pressuring tech firms to over-moderate content to avoid penalties.

"We are particularly concerned by potential mandates that would allow regulators to impose rigid, one-size-fits-all platform design requirements — such as forced chronological feeds or opt-in recommendation systems," the embassy stated.

The US submission cautioned that forcing platforms to "pre-emptively demote" posts could suppress independent journalists and controversial viewpoints, adding that "The U.S. government would likely consider such a measure as facilitating censorship". American officials also noted that because major platforms operate globally, these design mandates "may affect what users see, say and hear not just in or from Australia, but globally". Washington urged Canberra to clarify its criteria for determining online risks and called for exemptions for US social media firms.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese firmly rejected the censorship allegations while speaking in New York during the UN General Assembly.

"I'll always stand up for Australia's national interests, and the digital duty of care is something that we've foreshadowed for some period of time," Albanese told reporters. "It's not about giving government control, it's about giving people back control over what they receive on their devices".

Albanese defended the proposal as an "inevitable next stage" to tackle online misinformation and extreme political polarization. The debate unfolds less than a year after Australia enacted a controversial social media ban for children under 16.

The US critique has found resonance among domestic political opponents in Australia. Coalition frontbencher Andrew Bragg expressed agreement with Washington's warning, saying, "I think there is a risk of censorship. There is a risk of bestowing too much power onto unelected bureaucrats." The opposition had previously characterized the proposed framework as a "blank cheque for political censorship."

The clash highlights a broader divide over technology governance between the two allies. While Australia was among 22 nations advocating at the UN for global guardrails on artificial intelligence, President Donald Trump rejected international restrictions during his UN address. Trump announced his administration would officially rebrand AI as "super intelligence," claiming "the use of the word artificial makes it sound fake" and rejecting "any attempt to construct a globalist scheme to control the artificial intelligence being spoken of so much now".

Despite the rift, Albanese later shared a photograph on social media following a brief catch-up with Trump on the sidelines of the UN, captioning it: "Always good to catch up with @POTUS".

The Australian government expects to formally introduce the Digital Duty of Care bill to parliament later this year.