In a move that will surprise absolutely no one who has ever been sucked into a doomscrolling vortex, the Australian government has decided that maybe, just maybe, people should have some say over what their social media feeds shove in front of their faces. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, alongside Communications Minister Anika Wells and a group of advocates who clearly have better things to do than watch algorithmically curated cat videos, unveiled the draft digital duty of care bill.

Albanese, with the gravitas of a man about to take on the tech giants, declared that the legislation will give people over the age of 16 'genuine and enduring choice' about their feeds. The bill also requires platforms to 'protect children from harmful content, including content that promotes eating disorders, misogynistic content, pornography, and content that glorifies crime.' Because apparently, letting chatbots advise teenagers on 600-calorie diets wasn't on anyone's 'good ideas' list.

The PM was quick to reassure that this isn't about government control - it's about giving people control. Tech giants, however, might not feel so reassured, facing penalties of more than $100 million for breaches. That's a lot of ad revenue.

Wells explained the government's 'neutral choice' model: a pop-up will ask users if they want the algorithm or a simple following feed. Because nothing says 'empowering' like a pop-up interrupting your scroll. She noted that some people actually like algorithms - for entertainment, for supporting small local businesses, or for the sheer thrill of having their worst fears confirmed. Albanese added that if people want to doomscroll, that's their prerogative. We're glad to see the government is taking a firm stance on personal freedom.

The bill also outlines six 'serious harms' for kids, including eating disorder promotion, misogynistic content, pornography, crime glorification, and content causing serious distress. For adults, it's just illegal content. Because adults are clearly able to handle everything else, right?

Albanese 'emphatically' ruled out censorship of political statements, stressing the bill is about safety standards and putting the onus on big tech to identify and mitigate risks. Critics, however, remain skeptical, but the PM wasn't having any of it.

Meanwhile, the government is also dealing with other pressing matters. Protesters gathered outside the Israeli embassy in Canberra demanding justice for Zomi Frankcom, the Australian aid worker killed in Gaza. Albanese dodged a question on banning trade with Israeli settlements, sticking to the two-state solution script.

And in other news, the White Australia party, led by Tom Sewell, is at the High Court trying to overturn its ban under hate group laws. Because apparently, the implied freedom of political communication extends to being a neo-Nazi. Who knew?

Elsewhere, the Greens are in talks with Labor over carbon credits for a koala national park, trying to avoid an internal split. And Albanese savaged One Nation's plan to let people access superannuation early, calling it a threat to the principle of universality. Even Barnaby Joyce struggled to explain it, which is saying something.

In a world where tech companies have been running 'unregulated product testing on Australians,' this bill is a step toward accountability. As Albanese put it, 'This is a global reckoning coming for big tech.' We'll believe it when we see it.