US calls Australia's online duty-of-care bill censorship: the ABC calls the move 'extraordinary', the Guardian reports a demand to exempt US platforms

What happened. The Trump administration objected to Australia's planned digital duty of care law, according to the Guardian and ABC News (Australia). The Guardian says the objection came in a submission to the Albanese government's public consultation.

What the US says. The Guardian quotes the US as warning that the plan risks becoming "viewpoint-based censorship". It adds that the White House considers such measures "extraterritorial censorship of protected speech by Americans online". The ABC headline says the US called the bill a way to "facilitate censorship".

Where the two reports differ.

What is not settled.

• We hold only the ABC's opening line. It may report the exemption demand further down. We cannot say.
• The exemption demand rests on one report.
• We hold no response from the Australian government or the communications minister.
• We do not know whether the government will change the bill.

What this is about. Australia plans a law that would put a legal duty on large online platforms to protect their users from harm. The United States government says the law would censor Americans.

How it got here. Australia has regulated online content for longer than most democracies. It created an eSafety Commissioner in 2015. In 2021 it passed the Online Safety Act, which lets that regulator order harmful material taken down. In November 2024 parliament passed a law barring under-16s from holding social media accounts. The same month, the Albanese Labor government said it would legislate a "digital duty of care". Platforms would no longer just deal with harmful posts one by one. They would have to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm. The UK's Online Safety Act and the EU's Digital Services Act take a similar approach. According to the Guardian, the current plan would force firms to let users opt out of algorithms. It would also give the communications minister the power to declare what counts as "foreseeable harm". The government has put the plan out for public consultation.

The actors. The Albanese government writes the bill and must pass it through both houses of parliament. Most of the largest platforms are American companies. The Trump administration has publicly objected to European and British online-safety rules as limits on American speech. It has now made a submission to Australia's consultation.

What is at stake. If the bill passes as planned, US platforms would carry a legal duty set in Canberra. The Guardian reports that the US wants American platforms exempted. If that happened, the law would largely not apply to the firms it was written for. Australia and the US are close allies, bound by the ANZUS treaty and the AUKUS defence pact. This dispute sits inside that much larger relationship.

Where it stands. The consultation is under way. No bill has been passed. We hold no reply from the Australian government.