More Australians and small businesses could be locked out of their social media accounts as tech giants bluntly enforce a digital duty of care, the telecommunications industry ombudsman has warned, reinforcing her call for an independent complaints process.
Cynthia Gebert said she feared erroneous shutdowns, such as Meta closing a page dedicated to tracking the murder of women in Australia last week, could become more common if platforms ramp up their AI use to flag content in response to the latest plank in Labor’s online safety agenda .
Gebert said she supported the digital duty of care in its goal to protect Australians from online harm, but warned that as-is it could inadvertently make things worse, while leaving a hole where a big-tech ombudsman should be.
Australian social media accounts are among the most frequently shut down and hardest to recover, according to not-for-profit Repro Uncensored. In July, a wave of Meta suspensions hit popular local queer venues, which, along with the closure of Sherele Moody’s Femicide Watch page, has raised concerns about the type of content being targeted for removal.
An independent complaints avenue is one of the changes to Labor’s digital duty of care being pushed by the Greens, as well as tougher rules to discourage doomscrolling, larger fines, and to empower Australians to sue tech companies for online harm.
The minor party is Labor’s only path to passing the legislation in the next fortnight before parliament rises for the year. The Coalition has all but refused to negotiate on what it has branded an attack on free speech.
Meta reinstated Moody’s Femicide Watch Instagram account on Thursday after the anti-violence advocate mobilised an online campaign to get her page back, but Gebert said most people were left with no recourse.
“We don’t think that that’s really creating the right environment or holding big tech to account,” Gebert said. “Having an independent umpire is a really important part of the system.”
Meta conceded on Thursday that enforcing harm mitigation at scale meant its systems sometimes made mistakes. Individuals can appeal against a takedown in-app, but there is no way to contact a human and, if the appeal is rejected, the account is permanently disabled.
“We’re hearing from consumers that these are blunt, automated responses,” Gebert said.
“We are concerned that there’ll be more AI processes put in place to quickly deal with creating a more safe online environment,” she said. “[And] that there is a risk that incorrectly flagged posts could lead to more account lockouts.”
Social media had become a crucial communication tool, while small businesses often relied heavily on online outreach, she said.
“We’re hearing from small businesses who have designed their whole business model around engaging on social media that lose access to their accounts, and it’s putting their livelihoods at risk in a very material way,” she said.
“I’ve had people speaking to me about their mortgages on their homes being put at risk because they’ve lost access to their platforms.”
Labor’s digital duty of care would require platforms to protect Australians from seriously harmful content, such as violent threats or child exploitation material, as well as giving users the choice to opt in to an algorithm.
A spokesman for Communications Minister Anika Wells pointed to the laws empowering the eSafety commissioner to sue tech companies that did not develop adequate internal dispute resolution processes.
“We understand how frustrating it can be for Australians to report a complaint to a tech company and hear nothing back,” he said. “Right now there is nothing that says platforms must have effective complaints pathways.”
He added negotiations over final amendments to the bill were ongoing.
Gebert welcomed the requirement for internal dispute resolution, but said it did not go far enough.
She said an independent appeals process would complement the eSafety’s regulatory role and would be free to consumers who could not afford to sue privately, even if it became legally possible.
A cross-section of peak bodies and advocates, including the Human Rights Law Centre, CHOICE and Teach Us Consent, have backed the proposal for a consumer “safety net” funded by tech companies. The ACCC has twice previously recommended that the government establish a big tech ombudsman.
Complaints about digital services made to the telecommunications industry ombudsman soared 70 per cent in 2025-26 compared with the year before, despite not being within the office’s scope.
But Gebert said the full scale remained unclear because complaints were scattered between her office, the ACCC and the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner – none of which were empowered to act.
Gebert, who has long called for expanding her office’s powers to include digital platforms, said the digital duty of care was a good opportunity for the government to deliver.
Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter .
You have reached your maximum number of saved items.
Remove items from your saved list to add more.
You've used all of your gift articles. 3 more will become available on the 1st of every month.
