Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan announced new social media reforms on 19 July 2026. The proposals would let a government body called VCAT — which handles civil disputes in Victoria — order social media platforms to reveal the real identities of anonymous account holders when those accounts are used for online vilification, meaning posts that spread hatred against people or groups based on things like race or religion The Guardian.

The reforms, described as the first of their kind at a state level in Australia, also target how easily families can sue platforms when children suffer psychiatric harm. Right now, Victorian law requires families to prove a child has suffered at least 10% permanent impairment before they can pursue damages. Think of it like a high hurdle in a race — if the child's harm does not clear that bar, the case cannot go forward. The proposed changes would remove that hurdle entirely for cases involving children The Guardian.

The announcement, published under the title 'Big Tech Must Prevent Hate And Keep Kids Safe' on the premier's official site, places Victoria at the front of state-level efforts to make technology companies responsible for content they host premier.vic.gov.au. A related release from December 2025, 'Five Next Steps To Combat Anti-Semitism And Keep People Safe,' had already signalled the government's plan to hold social media companies and anonymous users to account under new vilification laws premier.vic.gov.au.

Victoria has secured national backing to pursue tech giants under vilification laws, meaning platforms will face liability for hosting hate content under a push led by Victoria that now has support across the country The Australian.

The news spread across Australian media, with the AAP newswire and the Canberra Times both reporting on the demasking powers under identical headlines on 19 July 2026 AAP Canberra Times.

Both the demasking powers and the lowered negligence threshold still need further development. The Victorian government will consult with VCAT, courts, and other stakeholders before finalising the reforms. The government has also indicated the measures may be extended to adult victims at a later stage The Guardian.

Marilyn Bromberg, a law associate professor at the University of Western Australia who specialises in social media regulation, said the demasking reforms should be extended to other online behaviours including defamation and cyberbullying The Guardian.

No specific bill name for the proposed reforms was mentioned in the reporting.

The broader context here is a state government testing how far it can push technology companies to take responsibility for what happens on their platforms. The demasking proposal goes after anonymity, which has been protected by procedural hurdles that make it hard and expensive to force platforms to identify users. If VCAT gains the power to order identity disclosure in vilification cases, it sets a precedent that other Australian states could copy, and one that legal scholars like Bromberg already want expanded to defamation and cyberbullying.

The negligence threshold reform works differently but heads in the same direction. The 10% permanent impairment requirement has acted as a high barrier, limiting the ability of families to sue platforms for psychiatric harm to children. Removing it for cases involving children opens a legal path that has been effectively closed, letting families pursue damages without meeting a quantified medical benchmark.

For technology companies operating in Australia, the combined effect of these proposals is pressure from two sides: liability for hosting hate content at the national level under Victoria's vilification push, and a lowered bar for negligence suits at the state level when children are involved. The consultation phase with VCAT, courts, and stakeholders will determine how these powers work in practice, but the direction is clear. Victoria is moving to impose real obligations on platforms that have long argued they are neutral conduits rather than publishers.