Let’s have a chat about duty of care.

My experience with X has reinforced why Australia needs to get serious about holding global technology and social media platforms accountable for the way they operate in this country.

HaveAChat.AI was suspended by X shortly after publishing a Driving About post, with X claiming its automated systems had detected “inauthentic behaviours”. When I challenged the suspension, X responded that a violation had occurred “specifically:” and then left the specific violation blank. I was told to complete on-screen instructions that did not exist, requested a genuine human review and was subsequently told my original case was still sitting in the queue. HaveAChat.AI remains permanently suspended.

A global technology company should not be able to use an automated system to suspend an Australian individual or business, refuse to identify the specific conduct that justified the decision and then hide behind another automated system when that decision is challenged. This experience has reinforced my support for the strengthened Digital Duty of Care now being advanced by Communications Minister Anika Wells and the Australian Government.

Australia needs strong laws governing global technology platforms operating here, backed by significant penalties when those laws are breached. Australians need protection from unlawful threats, harassment, predatory behaviour and coordinated harmful activity. Where there is credible evidence of coordinated or funded unlawful activity, Australian authorities should have appropriate powers to investigate who is behind it and where the money is coming from. At the same time, the platforms themselves must be accountable, with transparency, proper processes and genuine human review when automated systems make serious decisions affecting Australian individuals and businesses.

Freedom of speech should never mean freedom from accountability, but accountability must work both ways. HaveAChat.AI supports the direction Anika Wells and the Australian Government are taking. Every Australian political party should engage seriously with the proposed legislation, strengthen it where necessary and ensure Australia has the power to hold global technology companies accountable.

There is also considerable irony in the timing of HaveAChat.AI’s suspension. We had just introduced Driving About and started documenting how Australians can transition to electric vehicles, create immediate cash flow through opportunities such as rideshare and use that income to build their own future, just as Tesla was launching its Cybercab service in Austin.

HaveAChat.AI supports self-driving technology that assists a human driver. I use supervised self-driving technology myself and believe it has enormous potential. What we oppose are commercial driverless Robotaxis operating with nobody behind the wheel and replacing Australians who earn their living through passenger transport. HaveAChat.AI’s position is clear: driverless Robotaxis should never be allowed in Australia.

I am not suggesting Tesla, Elon Musk or Robotaxi had anything to do with HaveAChat.AI’s suspension. There is no evidence of that. But the timing makes the broader conversation about technology, power and accountability even more relevant.

If X believes HaveAChat.AI engaged in “inauthentic behaviours”, identify exactly what we did and which rule we broke. If X can substantiate its allegation, provide the evidence and a genuine human review. If X cannot substantiate it, restore the HaveAChat.AI account immediately.