Episode AI notes
- Legislation is being considered to allow victims of child sexual abuse to sue platforms and roll back some protections under section 230. The Kids Online Safety Act aims to impose stricter safety and privacy settings for minors.
- Bills related to social media companies have not been passed despite bipartisan agreement. Prioritization and differing priorities hinder progress on this issue.
- If the Democratic-controlled Senate passes a child safety or privacy law, pressure may be exerted on the Republican-led Senate to act. States are taking action on their own if the federal government does not.
- States have proposed regulations to limit kids’ access to social media or enhance consumer protections. Legal challenges from tech companies have stalled the implementation of these laws.
- Pending court decisions on state laws regarding children’s access to social media and parental consent could set a precedent with implications for other states and the federal level. Other countries are advancing their own protections.
- There is a complex understanding of the impact of social media on children’s lives. Comparisons between social media and big tobacco lack scientific evidence. (Time 0:00:00)
Balancing child protection and online platform liability Legislation is being considered to allow victims of child sexual abuse to sue platforms that facilitated their exploitation, and to roll back some protections under section 230 that made it difficult to bring lawsuits against these companies. Additionally, the Kids Online Safety Act aims to impose stricter safety and privacy settings for users under 18. However, Congress has faced challenges in passing these bills, with some senators expressing frustration over the lengthy process. Transcript: Speaker 1 But then later on at a press conference, he acknowledged, you know, where Congress is is partly to blame as well for not having moved some of these proposals. There’s a number of bills that are currently under consideration. Some of the main ones, too, before the committee that held the hearing yesterday, center around giving victims of child sexual abuse the ability, a mechanism, to actually bring lawsuits Against platforms if they have facilitated or promoted their exploitation in some way. That’s one piece. Another piece is to roll back some of the protections under the law, section 230, that have allowed these companies to often dismiss these lawsuits before they even get to discovery Or go to trial. And so those are two of the main pieces under consideration for the committee. There’s also a broader bill called the Kids Online Safety Act that deals more with the business obligations on companies. That bill would require companies to conduct assessments of how their tools might harm kids and also require them to implement safety, the most stringent safety and privacy settings For folks under 18 as a default. Speaking to this issue of controls and how much people actually enable them. But as you mentioned, it’s been extremely difficult for Congress to get this over the finish line. We heard some of the first station about that on the Hill yesterday. Senator Klobuchar said at one point, it’s been over 20 years that we’ve been kicking this around and we’re not doing anything. Speaker 2 I just want to get this stuff done. I’m so tired of this. It’s been 28 years, what? (Time 0:19:14)
Prioritize bipartisan action over partisanship The speaker expresses frustration over the lack of progress in passing bills related to social media regulation, despite bipartisan agreement that social media companies are often problematic. The holdup is attributed to the lack of prioritization and differing priorities, suggesting that bipartisan consensus does not necessarily translate into effective action. Transcript: Speaker 2 I just want to get this stuff done. I’m so tired of this. It’s been 28 years, what? Since the internet, we haven’t passed any of these bills because everyone’s double talk, double talk. It’s time to actually pass them. And I think what regular people find so surprising about that is that this does seem like a pretty bipartisan issue, right? Like it seems like the one thing that Republicans and Democrats are on the same page about is that social media companies are often terrible. And so given that, what’s the hold up, right? Why hasn’t there been more action on this? And why doesn’t that bipartisanship translate into something actually getting done? Speaker 1 Yeah, it’s not a red versus blue issue. And I think a lot of it comes down to priorities. (Time 0:20:50)
State Action on Child Safety and Privacy If the Democratic-controlled Senate passes a child safety or privacy law, there will be pressure on the Republican-led Senate to act. Lawmakers are wary of turning this into a partisan issue and are apprehensive about the potential for inaction at the federal level. States are taking matters into their own hands, as seen in Florida where a bill to ban children under 16 from social media platforms was approved by the House of Representatives. States are signaling that they will take action if the federal government does not. Transcript: Speaker 1 Right. And that’s something we’ll probably hear. If the Democratic-controlled Senate is able to pass a child safety or child privacy law, then there’s going to be pressure on the Republican-led Senate to pass something. And what lawmakers have really tried to avoid is turning this into a partisan food fight. And so I think there is apprehension about that as well. Speaker 2 I think that in light of the consternation about how little has happened on the federal level to tackle some of these issues, you see states trying to take their own sort of stance on this. One headline that stuck out to me recently was in Florida, where the House of Representatives there approved a bill that would bar children under 16 from social media platforms, like Period. And frankly, my reaction to that was like, wow, bold move. I don’t know if it’s going to pass, and I would love insights on whether that could actually be a thing, that you have the state of Florida banning children from using social media. But I wonder more broadly, what are the ways in which states are saying, look, we’re going to do something if the federal level isn’t. (Time 0:22:56)
Balancing State Proposals for Social Media Regulation States have proposed two main types of regulations for social media. One type aims to limit kids’ access, either by blocking them from joining social media without parental consent or by restricting their access. The other type seeks to increase consumer protections, such as stronger safety and privacy requirements. However, legal challenges from tech companies have stalled the implementation of these laws, prompting uncertainty about potential solutions in the future. Transcript: Speaker 1 Yeah, so I think there’s two main types of proposals that states have tried to pass. One is, as you’ve alluded, just limiting how much kids can access social media. The Florida law is one of the most stringent, Florida measure, I should say, is one of the most stringent attempts that we’ve seen. But there have already been some on the books that rather than blocking kids entirely, they block them unless the teen is able to obtain consent from their parents to join a site. There have been a number of those that have been passed, including in Arkansas and in Utah. So that’s one bucket. The other bucket are these measures that seek to require companies to beef up their consumer protections. So requiring stronger safety requirements, requiring stronger privacy settings, requiring companies to vet their products or potential harms to do audits. We’ve seen a number of those pass as well. But the fact is that I don’t believe any of those have gone into effect yet because they’re getting challenged in courts by groups that represent the tech companies that say that they Violate the Constitution and would infringe on free speech online. Speaker 2 So then what is the actual answer here, right? If it’s not so easy for states to enact this themselves, then what does that mean for potential solutions for the future? Speaker 1 Yeah. So a number of those laws at the state level have been halted, but we don’t know the final outcome. (Time 0:24:10)
Implications of Pending Court Decisions on State Social Media Laws Pending court decisions on state laws regarding children’s access to social media and parental consent could set a precedent with huge implications for other states and the federal level. Meanwhile, other countries, such as the United Kingdom, are advancing their own protections, surpassing the United States. The complexity of the issue is evident in conversations with concerned parents, as the comparison of social media to big tobacco lacks scientific evidence. Transcript: Speaker 1 Yeah. So a number of those laws at the state level have been halted, but we don’t know the final outcome. It’s possible that we’ll see decisions in the courts within the next year that will set a precedent for whether a state can ban kids from accessing social media or can require parental Consent. And that will have huge implications for other states and for the federal level. But until there’s a decision there, we’re pretty much in limbo as countries around the world, you know, including the United Kingdom, do advance some of their own protections and are Passing the United States at least in terms of getting laws on the books that try to address some of these issues. Speaker 2 I’m curious about some of the conversations that you have with parents who are concerned about this. And just where they’re at in thinking about how social media companies and the problems that have been highlighted again and again in recent years are taking an effect on the lives of Their children. Speaker 1 Yeah. I mean, it’s a very complicated issue. And it’s also not one that’s easy to paint with a broad brush. I mean, you’ll hear lawmakers on Capitol Hill and around the country talk a lot about social media being the new big tobacco. But frankly, the science isn’t there yet on that if it ever gets there. (Time 0:25:35)