Online Regulations and the Risk of Suppressing Sex Education Content

The Australian government’s proposed new online safety regulation, the “Digital Duty of Care,” has sparked concerns about potential unintended consequences. According to a report by The Conversation, the regulatory framework, which focuses on eliminating harmful content, could inadvertently obstruct the dissemination of public health information, such as sex education and sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevention.

In school sex education classes, students may learn about how to use condoms or the concept of consent. However, specific and practical guidance—such as what to do if a condom breaks, where to obtain emergency contraception (morning-after pill), information on post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for HIV, the importance of STI testing, or available support for those diagnosed with an infection—is often not covered. This gap has historically been filled by government agencies, community health organizations, peer-led health networks, and commercial services using social media as a platform to disseminate information.

Overview of the Digital Duty of Care

The Digital Duty of Care proposed by the Australian government is a framework also referred to as “Safety by Design.” The bill mandates all online service providers—including social media platforms, messaging apps, online games, dating services, and search engines—to establish risk management systems. Specifically, providers are required to identify potential risks arising from their services and take reasonable measures to prevent or mitigate severe harm.

This bill is intended to complement Australia’s pioneering social media minimum age law. While current online safety regulations focus on removing harmful content after it has been posted, the new Duty of Care emphasizes a preventative approach centered on risk management.

Risks of Suppressing Sex Education Content

The primary concern lies in how this new regulation might impact content that serves the public good, such as sex education and public health information. Currently, reports indicate that social media platforms often classify content related to sexual health as violating “community guidelines,” leading to shadow banning—an action that reduces the visibility of posts. The Conversation highlights the potential for these issues to worsen under stricter regulations.

The publication argues that “an approach solely focused on regulating harmful content overlooks the potential harm caused by suppressing or removing beneficial posts.” Community health organizations often share sexual health information targeted at adults on social media. However, even when culturally appropriate images are used, platform algorithms frequently misclassify such content as inappropriate.

Challenges in Platform Design

Social media platforms have prioritized developing algorithms to remove explicit harmful content, such as deepfakes. However, defining and protecting “valuable content”—like public health information or legitimate self-expression—and ensuring it is not mistakenly suppressed have often been secondary considerations.

The Conversation states, “An approach that regulates only harmful content, without defining content that serves public interests, such as public health information, news, or legitimate self-expression, overlooks the harm caused by suppressing useful posts.” This issue is a common challenge for all technologies as AI-driven content moderation continues to spread rapidly.

Editorial Opinion

This debate extends beyond Australia’s proposed regulatory framework; it fundamentally questions the design philosophy behind content moderation on online platforms.

In the short term, if the bill is enacted, NGOs and public health authorities providing information on sex education and HIV prevention may face increased risks of reduced post visibility or account restrictions. The likelihood of misjudgments by AI-driven automated moderation systems could rise, compelling platform operators to swiftly implement mitigation measures.

From a long-term perspective, the suppression of public health information could have far-reaching societal impacts. For young people in particular, restricted access to reliable online information sources could lead to public health crises, including a rise in STI transmission rates and unintended pregnancies. Social media has served as an inexpensive means to address niche informational needs that traditional school education and legacy media outlets often fail to cover. Blocking this channel could contribute to structural issues like widening information inequality, a concern emphasized by the editorial team.

References

• If we force online platforms to control harmful content, where does that leave sex ed? — The Conversation, Published July 2, 2026