As a Water/Plumbing Subject Matter Expert, I have been involved to the way Building Codes and Water policies are established. Engineers and science are used, not FaceBook MetaData. There is not 1st, Amendment for plumbing, so my world is a bit more straightfroward. But, manufactures do get in the way so to speak by having clout and a hand in the lobbiests.
It is too bad that we as a nation have been told that the Government is the problem, when the special interests are what sours the end results of government policy.
I hate being negative however, the writing of a bill like the one you suggest would provide a valuable tool to help protect our youth.
The real obstacle to protection for our youth — are the politicians who accept unprecedented amounts of money to protect their own power, and the companies determined to keep the cash flowing no matter the consequences.
As long as profits and political donations matter more than children, our youth will continue to be left vulnerable and unprotected.
That is a disgrace that should outrage every parent and every citizen.
I read somewhere that there is already pressure for the Age Verification stuff to be built-in to the operating system, which is an advantage for the platforms since they wouldn't have to do anything, but it is deeply troubling for user privacy. It is not as robust a solution as the EU open-source self identifying way either. I think the legislators don't realize how much of the internet runs on Linux, which is open-source.
We definitely don't want Big Tech given more reason to surveil everyone.
It sounds similar to serious penalties for the platforms for any minor found using them. No "The minor lied about their age. How can we control that?" excuse allowed.
Like rescinding liquor licenses of business selling to minors.
Thank you for the details about how to write a law to regulate platform conduct rather than user access. Funding to incentivize states to enforce the law by paying for the services that address the harms the law is responding to is critical to these laws’ success.
Speaking only from a data privacy standpoint, applying it to everyone would be safer than only to minors, as the latter would require ID verification for every user of the internet regardless of age. The result would be a globally-networked database of biometric and personal information. Aka, a universal surveillance state. Which is precisely what the big tech companies want — that’s why they fund so much of the research that yields evidence of the need for age-gating and the like.
The problem with regulating algorithms (which are not the source of most people’s objections to the internet/social media, but for the sake of argument we’ll go with it) is who gets to decide those regulations, and who those regulations exclude or suppress.
We could also solve most if not all of these problems by enforcing antitrust, enacting extensive and citizen-protective data privacy laws, providing universal healthcare that extends to mental health, and investing in community-building organizations and third spaces.
"Speaking only from a data privacy standpoint, applying it to everyone would be safer than only to minors, as the latter would require ID verification for every user of the internet regardless of age."
Well, no, since we are talking about social media algorithms damaging mental health, it doesn't apply to the whole internet or just minors.
But yes, Big Tech wants all the personal info they can get, to control people and sell ads.
The government of the country where the company is can regulate that company. That's why we supposedly got rid of Tiktok, but Trump intervened. But the other big social media platforms are US-based, so our govt can regulate them. (And it would be a good thing for the mental health of all users, not just minors, so there should be no age verification.)
We could use the same laws that the EU has for a bunch of those things you listed (data privacy, universal healthcare, etc.)
As a Water/Plumbing Subject Matter Expert, I have been involved to the way Building Codes and Water policies are established. Engineers and science are used, not FaceBook MetaData. There is not 1st, Amendment for plumbing, so my world is a bit more straightfroward. But, manufactures do get in the way so to speak by having clout and a hand in the lobbiests.
It is too bad that we as a nation have been told that the Government is the problem, when the special interests are what sours the end results of government policy.
👍👍
GenX reflex and now ear worm:
Schoolhouse Rocky
A chip off the block
Of your favorite schoolhouse
Schoolhouse Rock!
You’re right Trey
Forwarded this article to my state rep. Hoping he will read it.
So clear, so clean, so useful. Thank you.
I hate being negative however, the writing of a bill like the one you suggest would provide a valuable tool to help protect our youth.
The real obstacle to protection for our youth — are the politicians who accept unprecedented amounts of money to protect their own power, and the companies determined to keep the cash flowing no matter the consequences.
As long as profits and political donations matter more than children, our youth will continue to be left vulnerable and unprotected.
That is a disgrace that should outrage every parent and every citizen.
I read somewhere that there is already pressure for the Age Verification stuff to be built-in to the operating system, which is an advantage for the platforms since they wouldn't have to do anything, but it is deeply troubling for user privacy. It is not as robust a solution as the EU open-source self identifying way either. I think the legislators don't realize how much of the internet runs on Linux, which is open-source.
We definitely don't want Big Tech given more reason to surveil everyone.
Nah, gotta completely get rid of the internet outright.
Wishful thinking gets us no where, but in this case gives a least a short window to ,😊 smile in before we have to admit the reality: it won't happen.
It sounds similar to serious penalties for the platforms for any minor found using them. No "The minor lied about their age. How can we control that?" excuse allowed.
Like rescinding liquor licenses of business selling to minors.
Thank you for the details about how to write a law to regulate platform conduct rather than user access. Funding to incentivize states to enforce the law by paying for the services that address the harms the law is responding to is critical to these laws’ success.
Headline should have been “How To White A Law.” Because that is what all of our laws are, at this point.
How would this not be in violation of Section 230 of the CDA...? Which we cannot lose, or we lose the free and open web.
https://www.techdirt.com/2026/05/15/lets-help-children-not-trial-lawyers/
https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230
https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/
Seems like it works, because it's about regulating the algorithms used to show content to minors.
I think it should apply to everyone, not just minors.
Speaking only from a data privacy standpoint, applying it to everyone would be safer than only to minors, as the latter would require ID verification for every user of the internet regardless of age. The result would be a globally-networked database of biometric and personal information. Aka, a universal surveillance state. Which is precisely what the big tech companies want — that’s why they fund so much of the research that yields evidence of the need for age-gating and the like.
The problem with regulating algorithms (which are not the source of most people’s objections to the internet/social media, but for the sake of argument we’ll go with it) is who gets to decide those regulations, and who those regulations exclude or suppress.
We could also solve most if not all of these problems by enforcing antitrust, enacting extensive and citizen-protective data privacy laws, providing universal healthcare that extends to mental health, and investing in community-building organizations and third spaces.
"Speaking only from a data privacy standpoint, applying it to everyone would be safer than only to minors, as the latter would require ID verification for every user of the internet regardless of age."
Well, no, since we are talking about social media algorithms damaging mental health, it doesn't apply to the whole internet or just minors.
But yes, Big Tech wants all the personal info they can get, to control people and sell ads.
The government of the country where the company is can regulate that company. That's why we supposedly got rid of Tiktok, but Trump intervened. But the other big social media platforms are US-based, so our govt can regulate them. (And it would be a good thing for the mental health of all users, not just minors, so there should be no age verification.)
We could use the same laws that the EU has for a bunch of those things you listed (data privacy, universal healthcare, etc.)