Albanese government flags new online bans days after suspected sexual choking death of 16-year-old girl – as minister unleashes at social media giants: ‘Wrecking our young boys’
The Australian federal government is proposing new digital laws that would let users opt out of social media algorithms, alongside possible bans on pornography depicting strangulation or suffocation, as it seeks to curb violent, misogynistic content online. Social Services Minister Tanya Plibersek announced the move days after a 16-year-old girl in New South Wales died in an incident reportedly linked to sexual choking, arguing that harmful algorithms are "wrecking our young boys" by normalising unhealthy ideas about relationships. The proposals form part of Labor's planned digital duty of care legislation, which would require tech firms to proactively prevent online harms rather than simply respond to complaints.
Plibersek cited a claim that it takes an average of 23 minutes for users to be shown violent misogynistic content online, and noted that 60 per cent of young people report having experienced strangulation during sexual encounters, stating there is "no safe way to strangle someone." She said the government is examining a recent $18 billion (US) Meta settlement in the US involving child safety features, as well as UK laws criminalising strangulation and suffocation depictions in pornography, an approach NSW Liberal leader Kellie Sloane has also urged Albanese to adopt. Separately, the government named 14 members, including activist Chanel Contos, anti-violence campaigner Tarang Chawla and criminologist Hayley Boxall, to a new Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Advisory Council, which will hold its first meeting within the coming week.
- Australia weighs algorithm opt-outs and strangulation-porn bans after teen's death
- Minister blames social media algorithms for harming young men's attitudes
- New advisory council on domestic and sexual violence announced, meeting imminent
New here? Start with this
India's Reserve Bank has pulled back the curtains again on health of the state-run banks. Here's roughly two-three paragraphs of background on that Australian story.
Australia's Labor government, led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, is considering new laws to restrict how social media platforms operate, including letting users switch off the algorithms that recommend content to them, and possibly banning pornography that depicts strangulation or suffocation. These ideas sit within a broader "digital duty of care" bill the government has been developing, which would require tech companies to prevent harmful content proactively rather than only removing it after complaints.
The push has been given fresh urgency by the death of a 16-year-old girl in New South Wales, reportedly linked to sexual choking, which has prompted ministers, including Social Services Minister Tanya Plibersek, to speak out about the effects of violent and misogynistic content on young people. Choking or strangulation during sex has become more common in some pornography and, according to figures cited by officials, among young people's real-life sexual encounters, which has raised concern among politicians, campaigners and health experts about its risks. The UK has already made depicting strangulation or suffocation in pornography illegal, a model Australian politicians have pointed to as a possible template.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue that when a sixteen-year-old girl has died in circumstances linked to sexual choking, and when a majority of young people report experiencing strangulation during sex, government has not merely a right but a duty to act rather than wait for further tragedies. They contend that algorithms which reliably surface violent, misogynistic content within minutes are not neutral platforms but active radicalisation engines shaping how a generation understands intimacy and consent, and that giving users the ability to opt out, alongside restricting content that models a genuinely lethal act, is a proportionate response grounded in child protection and public health, comparable to precedents already set in the UK and reflected in major settlements against tech firms.
The case against
Sceptics of the proposals, while sharing the goal of protecting young people, worry that legislating against categories of pornography and mandating changes to algorithmic delivery sets a difficult precedent for state control over lawful adult content and private online experience, one that could prove poorly targeted, hard to enforce and easily circumvented via overseas platforms or VPNs. They argue that a single tragic death, however devastating, is a fragile basis for sweeping digital duty-of-care legislation, that correlation between online content and behaviour is difficult to prove causally, and that resources might be better directed toward relationship education, parental engagement and mental health support rather than content bans that risk symbolic politics without demonstrably changing outcomes.