Australians would have a free and simple way to raise complaints against tech giants under a crossbench amendment to Labor’s proposed digital safety laws.
Independents and the Greens are in favour of establishing a new industry-funded online ombudsman to resolve disputes, but the federal government has argued its draft digital duty of care bill already puts the onus on big tech to provide Australians with effective complaint pathways.
Mackellar MP Sophie Scamps will today put forward an amendment that would create an external avenue for appeal in cases like a small business owner being locked out of their social media account or individuals wanting harmful content addressed.
Labor has the numbers in parliament to pass the bill in the lower house without entertaining any changes but needs the support of the Greens, who are also in favour of an online ombudsman, to get the duty of care through the Senate next month.
The Coalition party room yesterday resolved to oppose the legislation after likening the digital duty of care to political censorship.
Labor's proposed duty would require online platforms like Facebook, TikTok and Instagram to take reasonable steps to prevent a range of harms for children, including bullying, misogyny and content promoting eating disorders.
Big tech would also have to limit adults' exposure to "serious" harms like threats of violence, stalking and the non-consensual sharing of intimate images.
The bill would also pave the way for Australians aged 16 and over to switch off algorithm-driven feeds and see content only from accounts they chose to follow.
Push for independent big tech watchdog
Ms Scamps said establishing an Online Services Ombudsman within the remit of the existing Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman would help people who currently felt "powerless" to resolve their problems.
"For many Australians, dealing with big tech platforms can feel like shouting into the void, with complaints met by automated responses, endless online forms or no meaningful response at all," she said.
"When platforms fail to act, there is nowhere independent to turn."
Ms Scamps said Labor's bill provided for stronger internal complaints and dispute resolution processes, but that alone was "not enough".
Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman Cynthia Gebert said the crossbench amendment was the "missing piece" in the government's digital agenda.
"People want someone to turn to when they're locked out of their social media account without warning or realistic avenue to appeal against big tech companies," she said.
Ms Gebert said thousands of people and small businesses were already reaching out seeking help she was unable to provide despite wanting to.
"The TIO stands ready to expand our role to help people when things go wrong online," she said.
Greens want laws with 'teeth'
Greens communications spokeswoman Sarah Hanson-Young said her party would be fighting to ensure the digital duty of care had "real teeth," prioritising tougher fines and the right to privately sue big tech.
"We know that these companies only respond to one thing: penalties that hit them where it hurts," she said.
Senator Hanson-Young said Australians also needed an external complaints pathway that was free from the "whims" of big tech moderators.
"This would put the safety of user, accountability and basic decency ahead of corporate profits," she said.
Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young says her party wants to see an option to privately sue big tech. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)
A spokeswoman for Communications Minister Anika Wells said the government understood how "frustrating" it was for Australians to report a complaint to a tech company and hear nothing back.
She said Labor's proposal empowered the eSafety commissioner to create "enforceable standards" to resolve disputes, which currently do not exist.
The Coalition will oppose Labor's bill, with Shadow Communications Minister Sarah Henderson taking issue with what she described as "dangerously vague" definitions and concerns the government would be able to spread propaganda.
"This is information control because of the wide range of discretion, both of the minister and also the eSafety commissioner, to determine what is harm online," she told News24 earlier this week.