An increasing number of states are moving to require social media companies to create child-safe versions of their sites as Washington struggles with how to shield kids.
Connecticut in June updated a privacy law to require online platforms to conduct children’s safety assessments, make design changes to help kids avoid harmful material and limit who can contact minors using messaging tools.
Vermont introduced a similar bill earlier this month and an Illinois lawmaker will introduce one next week. Legislators in New Mexico, Maryland and Minnesota are in the process of updating bills submitted last year.
The states are moving because they believe social media is contributing to increasing rates of mental illness among children, and because Congress hasn’t. There’s bipartisan support on Capitol Hill to do more, but lawmakers there can’t agree on whether a national privacy standard should override state laws.
A national standard that protects all kids would be best, said Vermont state Rep. Monique Priestley, a Democrat who recently introduced a child-safe design bill. “In the meantime, there’s a great network of states that are kind of coming together … to fill in that gap.”
Some states, like Utah and Arkansas, aren’t mandating site design changes but have passed laws requiring minors to get parental consent to access social media. South Carolina and New York lawmakers are considering bills that would regulate the algorithms social media companies use to direct content to minors.
In a separate tack, 33 states sued Meta, parent company of Facebook and Instagram, in October in federal court in San Francisco alleging it violated children’s privacy. If successful, it also could force the company to change its sites.
The legal battle is wide and the outcome far from clear. A 2022 California law, the first to mandate website design changes, is now in limbo after a tech industry group challenged it in federal court.
The prospect of having to comply with varying state laws has alarmed the tech firms, which are moving to convince state lawmakers new rules aren’t needed.
To do that, the firms are tightening their own controls over what kids see online. Meta is rolling out new protections that help children avoid content deemed harmful, such as posts about violence, sex or eating disorders.
The firms insist they don’t oppose regulation, but would prefer a national standard than a patchwork of 50 state rules.
“Laws that hold different apps to different standards in different states will leave teens with inconsistent online experiences,” said Liza Crenshaw, a public affairs manager at Meta.
Federal rules or federalism
Eighteen months ago, the House Energy and Commerce Committee voted 53-2 to pass the American Data Privacy and Protection Act to give Americans more control of their data and ban targeted advertising to minors.
It would have also created a new Federal Trade Commission division charged with considering additional rules to protect kids online.
But it failed to advance in the Senate, where the chair of the panel with jurisdiction, Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), declined to take it up. Cantwell said it was too weak on enforcement considering it would preempt more robust state privacy laws like California’s.
State preemption is non-negotiable for many Republicans, who foresee a legal minefield and an impediment to entrepreneurs if states can layer their own rules on top of a federal privacy standard.
“The only entities with the legal sophistication to comply with a regulatory landscape that complex are large companies with buildings full of lawyers,” said GOP Rep. Jay Obernolte, who represents a California district east of Los Angeles.
(politico.com)
