U.S. embassy calls Australia's proposed social media law censorship

Sept. 23 (UPI) — The United States criticized a proposed law in Australia that would give users the ability to opt out of social media algorithms, calling it censorship.

The new law, called the Digital Duty of Care, would require tech firms to give users the option to turn off the algorithms and failing to do so would result in fines.

The law will also require companies to limit harmful content. They will have to block content that promotes self-harm or eating disorders, limit their artificial intelligence chatbots, and limit addictive features in online games and apps.

The U.S. Embassy in Canberra issued a statement saying that it had “serious concerns” about the law and said it could allow the government to “enforce vague definitions of ‘harm'” and would lead to “viewpoint-based censorship.”

“We ask that Australia clarify how exactly ‘harm’ and ‘risks’ shall be determined … ensuring these definitions do not encroach on protected speech,” the embassy’s statement said.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese responded, saying the law would not allow government control but would empower the users to choose what they see.

“It’s not about giving government control,” Albanese told the media in New York, where he is attending the United Nations General Assembly. “It’s about giving people back control over what they receive on their devices.”

The embassy also said the laws may risk “reducing the reach of independent journalists or other voices whose content touches on sensitive or controversial topics.”

The opt-out would “allow regulators to impose rigid, one-size-fits-all platform design requirements” on tech firms, which could affect users outside of Australia, it said.

“Mandated platform design features, especially when applied to algorithms, may affect what users see, say, and hear not just in or from Australia, but globally.”

It also said the laws could affect Australia’s “reputation as a jurisdiction that enables innovation.”

Australia also introduced a social media ban for children younger than 16 last December, sparking other countries to follow suit.

Dali Kaafar, a professor at Macquarie University and executive director of its Cyber Security Hub, told The New York Times that it was unusual for the United States to intervene so directly using “language this strong.”

“These platforms operate globally, but the algorithms governing what Australians see, what is amplified to them and how their attention is shaped are largely designed and controlled overseas,” Kaafar said. “Australia has a legitimate interest in deciding what protections and choices should apply to people using those systems in Australia.”

Tama Leaver, a professor of Internet studies at Curtin University in Perth, told The Times that most users likely won’t opt out and said, “it is strange for the administration to take such a strong position on this when the likelihood is that even if it was implemented, it wouldn’t do much damage to the company’s bottom line,” Leaver told The Times.