Australia's "My Feed, My Way" Proposal: What the Legislation Would Actually Require

Australia has released draft legislation for consultation that would give social media users the right to switch off algorithm-based feeds. The "My Feed, My Way" initiative, announced by the Australian government, would require platforms to let users over 16 actively choose how their feed works, and would impose a duty of care on digital services to protect minors from addictive design and harmful content.

What the proposal requires for users over 16

The legislation would require social media platforms to notify both new and existing users and give them a meaningful choice between two types of feed. The first is an algorithmic feed that recommends personalised content based on user data. The second is a feed that shows only content from friends and creators the user has actively chosen to follow.

The notification requirement is significant. It is not enough for platforms to make the option available somewhere in settings. The legislation would require platforms to actively surface the choice to users.

Platforms that fail to comply could face penalties of up to AUD $109.2 million, approximately USD $79 million.

What the proposal requires for under-18s

The obligations for minors go further. Digital services including online games, apps, and AI chatbots would be required to protect under-18s from design features that have negative behavioural impacts. The proposal specifically names addictive features and those that can affect a young person's self-esteem.

Platforms would also be required to protect minors from a defined list of harmful content categories: material that promotes, encourages or accelerates eating disorders; content that promotes hostile ideas about women and gender equality; pornography; content that glorifies crime or life-endangering stunts; and content that causes serious mental health distress, including abuse and bullying.

The duty of care obligation

Beyond specific content and design requirements, the proposal introduces a broader duty of care. Platforms would be required to document the measures they take to address identified risks of harm to Australian users and to ensure those measures remain effective over time.

That last requirement is worth noting. It is not sufficient to implement a protective measure at one point in time and leave it unchanged. Platforms would need to demonstrate ongoing effectiveness, which implies regular review and adaptation as their products evolve.

The independent eSafety Commissioner would be responsible for compliance and enforcement.

Where this sits in the broader regulatory picture

Australia's proposal follows similar moves in other jurisdictions. New York's SAFE for Kids Act introduced default chronological feeds for under-18s and parental consent requirements for algorithmic feeds. Flanders enacted age verification requirements for harmful social media platforms. The EU's Digital Services Act requires very large platforms to offer non-profiling-based recommender systems as an accessible alternative.

Regulators across multiple jurisdictions are now requiring that users have a genuine, accessible choice about whether personalisation applies to them. Australia's proposal adds a duty of care obligation on top of that, requiring platforms to document and maintain protective measures rather than simply implement them once.

Fairpatterns helps organisations identify where their current design falls short of these requirements, before legislation comes into force.

‍