Australians could soon be able to choose what appears in their social media feed. How would this work?
People should have meaningful choices about the systems organising their attention.
Federal Social Services Minister Tanya Plibersek discussed the possibility of Australians opting into algorithmically curated social media feeds during an appearance on ABC’s Insiders program. The idea has been supported by sexual consent activist Chanel Contos, through her organisation Teach Us Consent, which campaigns for personalised recommendation algorithms to become opt-in. Under this proposal, users would default to a chronological feed featuring posts from accounts they have chosen to follow.
While there are benefits to this approach, it is essential to note that a chronological feed is not entirely non-algorithmic. It still relies on an algorithm, albeit a simple one that orders posts by time, showing the newest first. However, this highlights a gap in the current debate: the question should not only be about algorithms but also about what these algorithms should optimise for and who decides.
Social media feeds have evolved from simple chronological lists to complex systems that rely on sophisticated algorithms. These algorithms, driven by commercial interests, use individual and collective data to predict what will keep users engaged. While this has led to some useful discoveries, it also raises concerns about the type of content that often captures attention the most, such as sensational claims, interpersonal conflicts, or intentionally provocative material.
Introducing an opt-in feature for personalised recommendation algorithms could potentially address some of these issues by giving users more control over the content they see. Yet, the specifics of the alternative ranking mechanism remain unclear. Even a simple chronological feed does not guarantee a positive user experience, as it may still contain undesirable content such as rage bait, misinformation, or misogyny if those materials are already circulating within the accounts a user follows.
Some jurisdictions, like the European Union, have taken steps to allow users to choose a feed not based on algorithmic profiling. However, innovative experiments are also happening outside dominant platforms. For instance, Mastodon emphasizes chronological timelines and deliberate account following, while Bluesky offers a mix of chronological feeds and custom feeds created by various individuals and organisations.
This suggests a potential middle ground, where users can choose between different feeds for various purposes, such as news organisations prioritising verified reporting, universities sharing research, or communities centered around shared interests.
Written by urgent.news from The Conversation AU's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
