This week the Australian government will introduce its landmark Digital Duty of Care Bill to parliament. The bill aims to make platforms legally responsible for creating a “safe online environment” protecting users from “seriously harmful material and conduct”.

In the wake of recent controversies – including lawsuits in the United States accusing powerful platforms such as Meta of not doing enough to protect their users – this looks like a long overdue correction. But it’s not that simple.

One section of the bill defines “material or conduct that encourages, promotes, urges or instructs” illicit drug use and some kinds of sexual activity as “seriously harmful” to both adults and young people.

But this definition is fundamentally flawed. Here’s how it could actually undermine the government’s own strategies to reduce Australians’ risk of harm.

Some content is already being blocked

Harm-reduction work is a longstanding, fundamental component of Australia’s public health strategies. For decades, government-funded organisations have provided vital information to ensure people engage in safer drug use and sexual activity.

This requires a non-judgemental approach that meets people where they’re at. Social media content moderation systems often mistake this content for promotion. But harm reduction has been proven to save lives, preventing........

© The Conversation