Trump administration publicly attacks Australia's digital duty of care law
The US calls the proposed algorithm opt-out bill "extraterritorial censorship," demanding US tech firms be excluded in a rare public intervention.
What to know
- The Trump administration formally objected to Australia's digital duty of care bill, calling it "extraterritorial censorship" and demanding US tech firms be exempted—a demand that would effectively kill the law's core purpose.
- The public intervention is diplomatically unusual; governments typically air concerns through private channels, making this rebuke a notable escalation in US pressure on Australia's tech regulation.
- The timing coincides with PM Albanese's UN visit to promote Australian tech policies, including AI regulation and a teen social media ban—both increasingly at odds with Trump administration priorities.
The dispute Whether the US concern reflects genuine free speech protection or merely protects algorithmic influence mechanisms that benefit Trump's political interests. · positions read across 38 posts and comments
The US intervention is unwarranted overreach that violates Australian sovereignty.
-
“The only reason it's protected is because of US law, which only applies in US territories.”
spiteful-vengeance · Reddit ↗
Trump opposes the bill to preserve algorithmic power that benefits his political supporters.
-
“Because he knows, his supporters, like those of One Nation, only exist because of the algorithm. Thats their entire foundation.”
blakeavan · Reddit ↗
“digital services taxes, fines, and other forms of extortion on America's leading technology sector”
Kush Desai, White House spokesperson · ABC Australia ↗ · Aug 31
Trump administration objecting foreign government
Anthony Albanese Australian Prime MinisterKush Desai White House spokespersonAnika Wells Australian Communications Minister
How it unfolded 2 developments, newest first · click a bar or a number to jump articlespostscomments
-
2
US intervention on Australia policy marked by public nature, diplomatic rarity
Coverage emphasizes that while governments routinely comment on foreign policies, direct public interventions into another country's domestic debate are "exceedingly rare." The timing coincides with PM Albanese's visit to the US to promote Australian tech policies at the UN.
-
first by Japan Times, 1d ago · also Bloomberg Tech, Social Media Today, Sydney Morning Herald, Reuters, Channel News Asia, NYT Asia Pacific +3
7 more headlines
- US Rebukes Australia for Plan to Target Social Media Algorithms Bloomberg Tech · 1d ago
- US opposes Australia's proposed social media restrictions Social Media Today · 21h ago
- Albanese defends Australia's social media crackdown from Trump admin's ‘censorship’ blast Sydney Morning Herald · 21h ago
- US warns Australia's social media algorithm reforms risk ‘facilitating censorship’ Reuters · 21h ago
- U.S. Rebukes Australia Over Proposed Limits on Social Media Algorithms NYT Asia Pacific · 18h ago
- U.S. embassy calls Australia's proposed social media law censorship UPI · 11h ago
- US warns Australia’s social media reforms ‘facilitating censorship’ The Hill · 11h ago
-
first by The Independent, 22h ago · also Independent UK, ABC, Bloomberg, BBC, HN Frontpage, BBC Asia
4 more headlines
- US says Australia's proposed law to opt out of social media algorithm is ‘censorship’ The Independent · 21h ago
- Trump administration attacks Australia's ‘opt-out’ algorithm law in rare intervention ABC · 21h ago
- The US criticizes Australia's digital duty-of-care proposal, which has a provision that would require social media platforms to let users opt out of algorithms Bloomberg · 21h ago
- US criticises Australia's proposed algorithm opt-out laws as 'censorship' Mastodon · 2m ago
-
> "We ask that Australia clarify how exactly 'harm' and 'risks' shall be determined... ensuring these definitions do not encroach on protected speech," the US said in its submission.Australia should put this submission in the circular file. The US government's opinion about any of this shouldn't matter to Australia, especially when the intent is…
2 more of the top 3 · 25 posts in this stretch
-
T
The U.S. has criticized Australia's proposed social media reforms, which would give users the option to choose the content on their feeds, warning that Washington would likely view them as "facilitating censorship." https://www. japantimes.co.jp/news/2026/09/…
-
It benefits anyone who will benefit from a non centrist political landscape. That's not just right wingers. Epstein's follies were attended by a broad cross section of left and right, and this should give pause to anyone anywhere with party affiliations, but it won't. The Shining Path and the Return to Decency will retain their adherents, and…
-
-
1
Trump administration files formal objection to Australia's digital duty of care bill
The US Embassy published a submission to Australia's public consultation on the draft digital duty of care bill, objecting to design mandates that would force platforms to mitigate harms. The submission labeled the policy "extraterritorial censorship of protected speech" and called for US social media companies to be excluded.
“The US government would likely consider such a measure as facilitating censorship…”
— US government -
2 outlets US warns Australia that imposing digital duty of care on big tech would be seen as censorship
first by The Guardian, 1d ago · also ABC Australia
1 more headline
- US says Australian digital care bill would 'facilitate censorship' ABC Australia · 1d ago
-
first by Sydney Morning Herald, 1d ago
-
H
Somejättien edustajat toistelee, että: ”Ette te hakua algoritmeja pois! Sehän vain huonontaa käyttäjäkokemusta!” Jenkkihallitus huutaa väliin, että: ”EI ALGORITMEJA SAA OTTAA POIS PÄÄLTÄ! SE RAJOITTAA SANANVAPAUTTA!” Se mitä minä saan tästä irti on se, että somejättien algoritmit on käyttäjilleen haitallisia, tekijöitään rikastuttavia ja pitäis…
2 more of the top 3 · 13 posts in this stretch
-
How about Donny Dumbfuck goes and STFU and then takes a running fuck at a rolling donut? The rest of the planet is totally over his tantrums. This sort of shit is what back-channels are for. It will be pleasant when he has gone and politics is boring. (If that ever happens :-/)
-
H
Ugghh… https://www. abc.net.au/news/2026-09-22/tru mp-administration-slams-digital-duty-of-care-bill/107182970
-
Also covered reported alongside — the timeline has no entry for these yet
-
first by The Guardian, 21h ago · also Guardian Media
and 1 smaller piece
What people are saying 18 voices from 4 sites · best of 38 · verbatim
- How will Australia respond to the US demand to exempt US tech firms from the duty of care law?
- Today
-
NEW: The Trump administration has made an extraordinary public intervention in Australia's digital of care debate — It responded to a draft of the law saying it could lead to “extraterritorial censorship of protected speech” and demanded Australia exclude US tech companies — www.abc.net.au/news/... …
-
“It called for the Australian government to exclude US social media companies from its plans to give users the option to opt into algorithmic recommendation feeds .. would effectively neuter the law, removing the biggest platforms from its reach.”
-
This is an extraordinary act of direct foreign interference by the US embassy in domestic Australian politics. The Australian government should publicly respond by rejecting efforts by the US embassy to dictate how Australia legislates for a digital duty of care. [image]
-
You can read the full US submission/directive here, including the arrogant demands that Australia justify to the US government why it is acting to protect Australians from online harm. au.
-
You say draft bill, but can you link to it? I can only find descriptions from the PM: https://www.pm.gov.au/media/my-feed-my-wayWhat you've described isn't part of this?"The draft laws provide eSafety with the power to issue removal notices for nudify apps or websites, and streamline the child cyber-bulling and adult cyber abuse schemes to enable…
-
Two options from what I could see.You can entirely opt out of algorithmic feed and just see an unfiltered list of your connections posts.Or if you choose the algorithmic option, there's some ability for the ministers to request content be removed.Could it be abused to remove content they don't like? Of courseIs it a marked improvement on…
-
Wow, no, actually the complete opposite. Algorithms are free speech but not fair speech. They let those with money or otherwise control over the algorithm to speak far louder than anyone else, giving them an unfair speech advantage, or even taking away the free speech of others by drowning them out.We need free and fair speech, not just free…
- Yesterday
-
Thanks. Reading it at first seemed like “the people” here is you know, end users, people toggle some settings on their devices, not a government employee deciding. It turns out a government employee doing it. Yeah, just because US government is goofy doesn’t somehow make others sane or good.
-
P
호주가 소셜 미디어의 알고리즘을 옵트아웃(opt-out)할 수 있는 법안을 입법하려는 움직임을 두고 미국이 "검열"이라고 시비를 걸고 있네요. https://www. bbc.com/news/articles/cqj3dgy8 x3vro
-
This article is conflating two things. The US response to the Digital Duty of Care law and the US response to the algorithm opt-out provision.The US did criticize the opt out provision.But when the US says this, its about a different provision in DDC, which says platforms need to proactively remove harmful content.>"We ask that Australia clarify…
-
As is common in political shenanigans, the draft bill has a euphemistic label ('algorithmic opt-out') - what it actually does is allow unspecified bureaucrats such as the Minister for Communications to designate any individual piece of content as 'harmful' and have it banished from the internet.As an Australian who just wants relatively free…
-
What is an "algorithm"? Showing the 20 most recent posts is an algorithm, but I doubt that's what they're targeting with the law.I'm not just trying to find a technical gotcha here. I think it's worth identifying what exactly about an "algorithm" causes it to cross the line and become harmful.When does an algorithm become harmful?When it is…
-
D
Trump administration warns Labor social media crackdown is ‘censorship’ of Americans’ protected speech https://www. theguardian.com/media/2026/sep /22/us-warns-australia-that-imposing-digital-duty-of-care-on-big-tech-would-be-seen-as-censorship Trump administration expresses ‘serious concerns’ that forcing firms to allow algorithm opt-out would…
-
“Anything I don’t agree with is extremism and far right” Trust me, we know Who caused Bondi again? Why is twitter banned here for under 16’s, that’s supposedly right wing, but blue sky isn’t, and that’s right wing But how isn’t this a political attack again?
-
If true (what would I know) then to me it's is the utmost of the highest take on this so far while at the same time mirroring exactly what is happening here.
-
Because he knows, his supporters, like those of One Nation, only exist because of the algorithm. Thats their entire foundation. He knows without it, he’s nothing.
-
"extraterritorial censorship of protected speech" The only reason it's protected is because of US law, which only applies in US territories. Next they are going to ask us to pay tax to the IRS, or face charges of "extra territorial tax avoidance".
-
In an extremely uncommon move, the US government has publicly criticised an Australian government policy proposal. It wants US social media companies excluded from digital duty of care laws, which would give Australians the option to opt out of algorithmic feeds.