You could switch off social media algorithms
Senator Sarah Hanson-Young of the Greens wants every Australian to be able to turn off the feeds that pick posts for them. Big tech companies would also have to check their apps for harm and report on it. If they do not, they would face big fines.
Official name: Online Safety Amendment (Fix Our Feeds) Bill 2026
- Social media apps would have to let you turn off picked-for-you posts at any time.
- Big platforms would have a duty of care. That is a legal duty to take fair steps to stop harm to Australian users.
- Large companies would have to check for risks, put out yearly reports and share data with researchers.
- Fines could reach 100,000 fine units or 10% of a company's yearly sales, whichever is bigger. A fine unit is a set dollar amount.
- It comes from a senator who is not a minister. It is still before the Senate.
Who it affects
- People who use social media: You could turn off the feed that picks posts for you. Privacy settings would start at the highest level.
- Big tech companies: Large platforms would have a duty of care, risk checks, outside checks, yearly reports and heavy fines if they break the rules.
- Parents and children: Platforms with 630,000 or more Australian child users would count as large. They would face the extra rules.
- Researchers: Large platforms would have to hand over data to Australian researchers doing work that is not for profit.
- The eSafety Commissioner: This online safety official would take complaints, set standards, order checks and demand papers.
Apps pick what you see
Most social media apps decide what you see. A computer system, called an algorithm, ranks posts. It suggests new ones based on what it knows about you.
Senator Sarah Hanson-Young brought this bill to the Senate, Parliament's second house, on 1 April 2026. Her notes on the bill say world tech companies make money from services built to be addictive. She says they do this even when the posts are harmful or stir up hate and division.
The bill changes the Online Safety Act 2021. That is the main law about safety on the internet in Australia. The bill has two parts. The first lets you turn off picked-for-you posts. The second creates a duty of care for online services.
Switching off recommended feeds
The bill sets out what picked-for-you posts are. They are anything a social media service shows you because a system puts some posts first, or makes suggestions just for you. That covers the For You style feed most apps use.
Every social media service would have to let all Australian users turn off these posts at any time. Today no Australian law makes them offer that choice.
A company that does not obey could be fined by a court. This is not a criminal charge. The fine is the bigger of 100,000 fine units or 10% of the company's yearly sales. A fine unit is a set dollar amount used to work out fines.
Say you keep getting shown videos you never asked for. Under this bill you could switch the suggestions off and see a plainer feed.
Making a complaint
Say you think a platform is not letting you turn off these posts. You could complain to the eSafety Commissioner. That is the government official who deals with harm online.
The Commissioner could look into it, using powers the law already gives. The Commissioner could copy material as part of the case. People who make a complaint honestly would be protected from being sued for it.
Services the duty covers
The second part applies to online services the law covers. These are social media services, and websites and apps the law already covers. They also include messaging and other online services.
Every company would have to put out how many Australian users it has, and how many of them are children.
Bigger rules apply to large companies. A company counts as large if any one of three things is true. Its Australian users are more than 10% of the population. It has 2.6 million or more Australian users. Or it has 630,000 or more Australian users who are children.
Duty of care and checks
A large company would have to take fair steps to run its business honestly. It would also have to take fair steps to stop harm to Australian users. This is the duty of care.
Large companies would have to check for risks. That means looking for the ways their service could hurt people. They would have to keep the check up to date. They would review it at least once every three years and put it out with a report.
They would then need rules and a written plan to manage those risks. They would have to take fair steps to carry the plan out. The eSafety Commissioner could set standards for both the risk checks and the plans.
Reports, audits and research data
Large companies would put out a report every year that shows how they work. It would cover how the service is built, including its algorithms. It would give figures on users, scams, child safety and ads.
The Commissioner could pick an outside checker to see whether a company is following the rules. The company would have to help.
Large companies would also have to give data to researchers linked to Australian research groups, as long as the research is not for profit. They would keep a public list of their user numbers, risk checks and yearly reports.
Privacy settings and ads
Large companies would have to make the highest privacy settings the starting point for Australian users. You would also get the choice to say no to ads picked for you based on your data.
Say you open a new account. Under this bill your profile would start on the most private setting. You could say no to ads aimed at you.
Rules for senior bosses
The bill sets rules for people in senior jobs at a company. Large companies would have to tell the Commissioner when these people change.
These bosses would have to act honestly. They would have to work with the Commissioner and with the media and phone watchdog. A boss who fails to stop the law being broken could face a fine of 500 fine units.
Fines and enforcement
Breaking the report rules or the rules for large companies could bring the same top fine as the feed rule. That is the bigger of 100,000 fine units or 10% of yearly sales.
The Commissioner could accept a written promise from a company to fix a problem. Or the Commissioner could ask a court to order it to stop.
The Commissioner could also demand papers and facts about how a company meets its duties. Ignoring that demand could cost 100 fine units. The Commissioner's yearly report would have to say how many of these demands were made.
Waiting in the Senate
If passed, the law would start the day after the Governor-General signs it. The Governor-General stands in for the King.
Senator Hanson-Young brought the bill into the Senate on 1 April 2026. The same day, she formally asked the Senate to vote on its main idea. The government did not bring this bill.
It is still before the Senate. The Senate would need to debate it and pass it. Then the House of Representatives, the lower house, would need to pass it too.
Its journey through Parliament
| 01 Apr 2026 | Senate: Introduced and read a first time |
| 01 Apr 2026 | Senate: Second reading moved |