Australians harmed by social media should be able to sue for compensation under the Albanese government’s proposed digital duty of care laws, according to more than 80 community organisations and prominent academics.
By Tegan George
Mon 9 Nov 2026 14.54 AEDT
Photo: AAP Image/Mick Tsikas
Australians harmed by social media should be able to sue for compensation under the Albanese government’s proposed digital duty of care laws, according to more than 80 community organisations and prominent academics.
In an open letter to Communications Minister Anika Wells, the signatories called for the government to significantly strengthen the proposed legislation before it passes the Senate.
“A duty of care only ever works if those harmed when it is breached can seek compensation from the courts,” said Josh Bornstein, director of corporate regulation at the Australia Institute.
“The threat of being liable for substantial compensation is critical to ensuring corporations act responsibly and lawfully.”
While Australians can already pursue legal action over some forms of online harm, the proposed laws wouldn’t give individuals a specific right to sue digital platforms for breaching their duty of care.
Instead, enforcement would fall to the eSafety Commissioner.
The Australia Institute is leading the push, with its polling showing 83 per cent of Australians support financial penalties for offending companies and 50 per cent back jail terms for their executives.
Other signatories include the Australian Education Union, National Tertiary Education Union, Australian Services Union, Equality Australia, Teach Us Consent, Working with Women Alliance, the Victorian Trades Hall Council, and the Human Rights Law Centre.
Mr Bornstein argued that enforcing the new laws shouldn’t be left solely to eSafety.
In July, eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant told a royal commission that antisemitism and hate speech were not specifically covered by the regulator’s powers, as reported by Guardian Australia.
She also revealed that just two per cent of adult cyber-abuse complaints met the high threshold for action due to freedom-of-speech protections.
Quality research, analysis, explainers and factchecks from experts you can trust.
“The eSafety Commissioner supports a private right of action,” said Mr Bornstein.
“There is also an important role for our courts in the ongoing interpretation and application of the new digital duty of care.”
The government released its draft digital duty of care laws in September, proposing to shift greater responsibility for preventing online harm onto digital platforms.
“This is not about giving government control, it is about giving people control,” Mr Albanese said at the time.
The legislation passed the Lower House in late October, with the government hoping to get it through the Senate by the end of the year.
The organisations are also pushing for stronger protections against racist and homophobic hate speech, and substantial penalties for social media companies that break the law.
The call has drawn the support of the Alannah & Madeline Foundation, Climate Justice Union, the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women’s Alliance, the Australian Secondary Principals’ Association, the Disability Advocacy Network Australia and Australian Multicultural Foundation.
“The Albanese Government should be commended for including gendered violence as a serious online harm in the bill. But it needs to address other forms of hate speech including racist and homophobic hate speech,” said Mr Bornstein.
“As the Royal Commission into antisemitism made clear, the most extreme forms of hate speech are propagated by social media giants because they profit from doing so.
“That has got to stop.”
