Australia plans an algorithm off switch
Toxic algorithms wouldn't let them go - now Australia wants an off switch
Sunday, 18 October 2026
Photo by Paul-Alain Hunt on Unsplash
Warm-up
- How often do you change your social media settings?
- Have you ever seen posts you did not want to see?
- What helps you take a break from your phone?
Vocabulary
- algorithm
- A set of rules a computer uses to choose or show content
- platform
- A website or app where people share and view content
- reform
- A planned change to improve a system or law
- Duty
- A legal or moral responsibility to do something
- critic
- A person who disagrees with or speaks against something
- disinformation
- False information shared to mislead people
- polarisation
- When people split into opposing groups with stronger views
- addiction
- A strong, harmful need to keep doing something
Reading
Listen to this story
British EnglishAustralia has introduced new tech reforms to parliament that target social media. The plan’s centrepiece is an algorithm switch that would let users turn off recommender feeds. With the switch off, people would see posts only from accounts they follow. The laws would also place a duty of care on online services and platforms, aiming to make Australians healthier and happier.
Supporters point to real cases. Varsha Yajman says she kept seeing weight loss content even with safety settings on. Flynn Martin says misogynist influencer Andrew Tate and similar voices filled his feed. Research links heavy social media use to brain responses like gambling and addiction, finds algorithms can push harmful posts, and warns about disinformation and rising polarisation.
Critics say the reforms go too far and could threaten free speech. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government argues the rules would give users more choice.
Comprehension
- What would the algorithm switch allow users to do?
- Whose stories are used to show the problem?
- What extra responsibility would the laws place on platforms?
- What do critics say about the proposed reforms?
- What harms do studies link to social media use?
Grammar focus
Should have
Use should have + past participle to talk about the right action in the past (advice, regret, criticism). Use shouldn’t have for a wrong action. Form: should/shouldn’t have + V3. (Examples constructed.)
- Some users should have turned the switch off earlier.
- Companies shouldn't have overlooked the risks for so long.
Grammar exercise
Complete with should have / shouldn’t have + past participle.
- It was a mistake; the app (push) ___ harmful posts — never.
- To help users, platforms (give) ___ clearer controls earlier.
- He regrets it; he (follow) ___ those toxic accounts — never.
- Given the risks, researchers (warn) ___ schools sooner.
- In parliament, officials (explain) ___ the switch earlier.
Discussion
- Would you use a following-only feed? Why or why not?
- Who should decide what you see online: you, platforms, or laws?
- Are current safety tools enough on social media? Explain.
- How can platforms reduce harm without limiting free speech?
Vocabulary, reading, and exercises with instant feedback
Spotted a mistake in this lesson? Tell us.