Digital Duty of Care: how Australians can have their say

This needs our attention. The Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill 2026 is something every Australian — especially digital entrepreneurs and creators — should be paying attention to.

What is happening?

The Australian Government released an exposure draft of the Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill 2026 on 8 September 2026. The proposed Digital Duty of Care would require regulated online services to take reasonable steps to identify and manage foreseeable risks of online harm. The Government says the framework is intended to build on Australia's existing online-safety protections and increase accountability and transparency.

Sounds good, right? Of course we want Australians protected from genuine harm online. But here is the question: what happens to freedom of speech when 'online safety' starts influencing what platforms allow, remove, restrict, recommend or suppress?

That is where we need to ask serious questions.

When the righteous rule, the people rejoice; when the wicked rule, the people groan.

Proverbs 29:2

Why this matters for digital entrepreneurs, creators and business owners

As a digital entrepreneur, creator and business owner, the internet isn't just somewhere I scroll. It's where I create. Build. Communicate. Share ideas. Reach people. Build businesses.

Australians should be free to express lawful opinions and ideas — including opinions that are unpopular, controversial or that other people disagree with. We should be able to protect people from genuine harm without creating a system that incentivises platforms to silence lawful voices simply because something is controversial or creates regulatory risk.

Let it be said plainly: a duty of care that quietly shifts the burden of judging what speech is 'foreseeably harmful' onto platforms is, in effect, one step toward facilitating censorship. Whether it becomes that depends entirely on the definitions, thresholds, safeguards and oversight written into the law — which is precisely why those definitions deserve public scrutiny now, while the framework is still being shaped.

The questions we need to be asking

These aren't questions about whether online safety matters. It does. They're questions about how we protect Australians without unnecessarily compromising freedom of expression.

1. What exactly counts as 'foreseeable harm'?

• What specific criteria will determine whether something constitutes a foreseeable harm?
• Who makes that determination?
• What evidence or threshold will be required?
• Can platforms or users challenge those determinations?

2. Who decides what crosses that line?

• How will the framework distinguish genuine harm from lawful but controversial, unpopular or politically sensitive speech?
• What prevents platforms from over-removing or downranking lawful content simply to reduce regulatory risk?
• Will users be told why their content has been restricted?
• What meaningful appeal rights will they have?

3. Could safety requirements influence algorithms and what Australians see?

• Platforms increasingly determine what people see through recommendation and ranking systems.
• Will the Government prescribe particular platform or algorithm designs?
• Could safety obligations indirectly encourage platforms to suppress or deprioritise lawful content?
• How will platform-specific technology and different business models be considered?
• How will the law remain technologically neutral as AI and digital platforms evolve?

4. What appeal rights will users have if their content is removed or restricted?

If a decision can affect someone's ability to speak, publish, earn an income or reach an audience, there should be meaningful safeguards.

• Can users appeal platform decisions?
• Can platforms challenge regulatory decisions?
• Who independently reviews disputed decisions?
• How quickly must appeals be resolved?

5. What additional data will platforms need to collect about Australians?

Safety systems may involve analysing significant amounts of information about users and their behaviour. Australians should ask:

• What additional data will platforms be expected to collect?
• Who can access it?
• How long can it be retained?
• What protections apply to commercially sensitive and personal information?
• Could the framework unintentionally encourage greater surveillance of Australians?

6. Who holds regulators accountable?

Australia already has the Online Safety Act 2021 and the eSafety Commissioner.

• What new powers will the Digital Duty of Care create?
• Which existing powers will be replaced or consolidated?
• How will overlapping regulatory requirements be managed?
• What independent oversight will apply to regulatory decisions?
• What parliamentary review mechanisms will exist?

7. What could this mean for creators, entrepreneurs, independent journalists and small businesses?

Digital platforms are increasingly important for Australian entrepreneurs, independent journalists, creators, charities and small businesses.

• Could safety-related changes affect organic reach and discoverability?
• Could smaller creators be disproportionately affected because they have fewer resources to challenge decisions?
• What assessment has been made of the economic impact?
• How will independent Australian voices continue to reach audiences?
• Will obligations be proportionate to the size and risk profile of a service?
• Could compliance costs create barriers to innovation?

Twelve questions to take to your MP or senators

• What exactly constitutes 'foreseeable harm'?
• Who decides whether that threshold has been met?
• What protections exist for lawful but controversial speech?
• What prevents platforms from over-removing content to avoid regulatory penalties?
• What data will platforms be required to collect about Australians?
• Who can access that data, and for how long?
• What independent appeal process will users have?
• How will regulatory decisions be independently reviewed?
• How will Australian creators and small businesses be protected from unintended algorithmic consequences?
• How will the legislation remain technologically neutral as AI develops?
• How will overlapping regulatory powers be prevented from creating unnecessary complexity?
• What parliamentary review mechanisms will determine whether the framework is actually achieving its intended purpose?

So what can you do?

The formal public consultation on the exposure draft closed on 22 September 2026 — but that doesn't mean the conversation is over. As the legislation progresses, Australians can contact their federal representatives and participate in the parliamentary process, including any future committee inquiries or public submission opportunities.

Get informed

Read the proposal. Understand what is actually being proposed before forming your view. You can read the exposure draft of the Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill 2026 on the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts website — https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/department/media/publications/exposure-draft-online-safety-amendment-digital-duty-care-bill-2026

Ask questions

Contact your Federal MP and Senators. Do not just say 'I support online safety' or 'I oppose regulation.' Ask about the actual mechanisms, definitions, powers, safeguards and consequences. Bring evidence, lived experience, professional expertise and specific concerns. Not sure who your local MP or senators are? You can find your federal electorate and your incumbent member at the Australian Electoral Commission's Find My Electorate tool — https://electorate.aec.gov.au/ — and search all senators and members on the Parliament of Australia website — https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members

• What is your position on the Digital Duty of Care?
• When will the legislation be introduced?
• Will there be a parliamentary committee inquiry?
• Will Australians have another opportunity to make public submissions?
• What safeguards will protect lawful speech, privacy and due process?

Follow the process

Watch for the legislation, parliamentary debate and any future committee inquiries or opportunities for public participation. Follow the legislation as it is introduced, debated and potentially referred to committees.

Use your voice

Because if you're a creator, entrepreneur, business owner, journalist, commentator — or simply an Australian who values the ability to speak freely — this affects you.

General template: writing to your local MP

If you want to contact your MP but are not sure where to start, here is a general template you can adapt. Replace the bracketed sections with your own details and concerns.

Subject: [Your concern / issue] — Request for your response

Dear [MP's Name],

I am writing as a constituent of [electorate/suburb] regarding [issue, bill, policy or proposed legislation].

I am concerned about [briefly explain what concerns you and why].

This issue matters to me because [explain how it personally affects you, your family, your community, your work, your business or Australians more broadly].

My main concerns are:

• [Concern 1]
• [Concern 2]
• [Concern 3]
• [Concern 4]

I would like to understand:

• [Question you want your MP to answer]
• [Question you want your MP to answer]
• [Question you want your MP to answer]
• [Question you want your MP to answer]

I understand there may be different perspectives on this issue, and I am contacting you because I would like to understand your position and how you intend to represent your constituents on this matter.

I respectfully ask that you:

• Consider these concerns;
• Explain your position on [issue];
• Advise what action you are taking, or intend to take;
• And, where appropriate, raise these concerns within Parliament or with the relevant Minister.

I believe it is important that Australians remain informed and engaged in the decisions that affect our communities and our country.

Thank you for taking the time to consider my concerns. I would appreciate a written response.

Kind regards,

• [Full Name]
• [Suburb]
• [Postcode]
• [Electorate, if known]
• [Optional: Profession/business/community role]
• [Contact details]

An international perspective

The United States Government has also responded to the Australian consultation, raising concerns about the implications for free expression, innovation and the treatment of US-based platforms. Reading that response alongside the Australian proposal gives a fuller picture of the stakes.

• U.S. Government response to the Australian consultation on the Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill 2026 — https://au.usembassy.gov/u-s-government-response-to-the-australian-consultation-on-the-online-safety-amendment-digital-duty-of-care-bill-2026/

Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy.

Proverbs 31:8-9

Get informed. Speak up. Get involved. Because freedom of speech matters. The renaissance does not belong to the silent. It belongs to the faithful who steward their voice in every sphere of influence — including the sphere where the laws that shape speech itself are written. If this is your sphere, this is your assignment.