The push gained traction after the U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy told CNN on Sunday that he believes 13 is “too early” for teenagers to be joining apps like Instagram and TikTok, which he said can create a “distorted environment” that “often does a disservice” to kids.
Since then, other officials including Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and the Federal Trade Commission’s Alvaro Bedoya have either voiced support or shared the remarks on Twitter. Jim Steyer, a outstanding children’s safety advocate, called the comments “an enormous deal.”
“This is strictly the form of leadership we’d like from our Federal government in relation to educating the general public about technology’s impact on society,” Steyer, whose advocacy group Common Sense Media has close ties to the White House, said in an emailed statement.
Now the movement is fueling laws on Capitol Hill: A House Republican on Thursday is introducing a bill to ban kids and teenagers under 16 from using social media.
The bill represents one of the crucial stringent efforts yet to maintain kids off major platforms, going far beyond more narrow bipartisan proposals to arrange guardrails for teenagers online.
The measure, led by Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah), would require firms to confirm users’ ages and permit parents to sue them in the event that they fail to maintain those under 16 off their sites. It could also empower federal and state agencies to implement the standards.
The proposal sets a high bar: While lawmakers have introduced bills to expand restrictions on practices like targeting ads to users as much as 18, few have called for outright bans.
Stewart likened the effect social media can have on children and teenagers to that of medication, a refrain that’s becoming increasingly common in Washington.
“We protect our kids from drinking, from smoking, from driving. They’ll’t drive after they’re 12,” he said in an interview. “We must always protect them from the impacts of social media.”
Many social media platforms, including TikTok and Twitter, already prohibit users under 13 from joining, but some comparable to YouTube offer a separate service designed for teenagers, while others like Instagram have mulled launching their very own.
Those plans have faced intense scrutiny from children’s safety advocates and lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who’ve said they don’t trust the businesses to safeguard their children.
Stewart’s proposal would open firms as much as liability in the event that they fail to adequately vet users’ ages and sure pose significant compliance challenges for firms, who’ve poured major funds into developing verification tools they acknowledge can fall short.
Many kids and teenagers don’t have identification, while others find workarounds to affix platforms. In turn, quite a few platforms have resorted to asking users to supply their birthdays.
Tech industry leaders have urged lawmakers to assist those efforts by crafting laws to establish standards or best practices for age verification. Michael Beckerman, TikTok’s head of U.S. public policy, told Senate lawmakers at a hearing in 2021 that any effort to update children’s privacy protections should include “a greater method to confirm age across the web.”
NetChoice, a trade group representing social networks including TikTok and Twitter, pushed back on the surgeon general’s comment that 13 is “too early” for teenagers to be on social media, arguing such decisions ought to be left to folks.
“Parents, not the federal government, not Silicon Valley, know what’s best for his or her families,” said Carl Szabo, NetChoice vice chairman and general counsel. “Somewhat than doomsaying or attempting to get between parents and their families, the federal government should provide tools and education on how best to make use of this latest technology, not demonize it.”
Industry and human rights groups alike have also cautioned that cutting kids and teenagers off from social media could backfire by removing access to positive digital resources.
“For a lot of kids, especially LGBTQ young individuals who could have unsupportive parents or live in a conservative area, the web and social media are a lifeline,” said Evan Greer, director of the advocacy group Fight for the Future. “There are very real concerns concerning the ways in which Big Tech firms’ business practices harm kids, but we’d like higher solutions than simply cutting kids off from online community and academic resources.”
Judge set to reject FTC’s bid to dam Meta’s VR deal
A federal judge in California greenlit a deal by Facebook’s parent company Meta to purchase virtual reality company Inside Unlimited, my colleagues Naomi Nix and Cat Zakrzewski report. The ruling deals “a blow to Democrats’ efforts to dismantle the facility of Silicon Valley tech firms,” in response to the report.
But in a possible silver lining for antitrust advocates, “the order did affirm a few of the arguments that the FTC made in its case, including that acquisitions of nascent firms can hurt competition and that firms not currently in a marketplace can still have influence over the marketplace.”
The choice could significantly shape how the agency approaches challenges in emerging digital markets moving forward. Bloomberg News first reported the judge’s ruling.
GoodRx leaked user health data to Facebook and Google, FTC says
The Federal Trade Commission on Wednesday imposed a wonderful of $1.5 million on GoodRx, a drug discount app, for leaking tens of millions of users’ sensitive health information to firms like Facebook and Google without consent, Natasha Singer reports for the Recent York Times.
In its grievance, the FTC said GoodRx’s use of tracking tools and other information-sharing practices to discover users’ social media accounts for targeted medical ad purposes went against a federal regulation that requires health apps to notify consumers of cybersecurity breaches and the unauthorized disclosure of their data to a 3rd party.
The app, which is used to seek out lower prices on prescriptions like antidepressants, HIV medications and coverings for sexually transmitted diseases, said it disagreed with the regulator’s accusations dating back to 2017 but agreed to settle the case to avoid litigation.
If the settlement is approved by a judge, GoodRx could be permanently prohibited from disclosing users’ health details for promoting purposes. This case marks the primary time that the commission has deployed its Health Notification Rule. It comes because the FTC is cracking down on health privacy and security, especially in states which have moved to ban or restrict access to abortions.
Amazon faces three fresh safety citations for warehouse violations
The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration announced citations on Wednesday against Amazon after conducting inspections at three of its warehouses in Colorado, Idaho and Recent York, the Wall Street Journal’s Sebastian Herrera reports.
“The agency said it found Amazon exposed employees to a high risk of injuries and muscle-related disorders on the facilities attributable to the fast pace at which employees must handle packages and long hours required to finish tasks,” in response to the report.
“Amazon’s operating methods are creating hazardous work conditions and processes, resulting in serious employee injuries,” Doug Parker, assistant secretary for occupational safety and health, said in a written statement.
Kelly Nantel, an Amazon spokeswoman, said in a written statement to the Wall Street Journal that the corporate takes the protection and health of its employees seriously and doesn’t consider the federal government’s allegations reflect the fact of safety at Amazon sites. (Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.)
That’s all for today — thanks a lot for joining us! Be sure to inform others to subscribe to The Technology 202 here. Get in contact with suggestions, feedback or greetings on Twitter or email.
