National

Instagram is the latest platform to launch new tools aimed at enforcing its age policies, as kids' screen time rises and regulators threaten greater scrutiny of social media's effects on children.

Why it matters: Social media giants are grappling with how to determine with certainty the age of their visitors to both evade regulatory crosshairs and create safer online experiences for children.

Driving the news: Instagram on Thursday said, starting in the U.S., if a user tries to edit their birthdate from under 18 to over 18, they will have to prove their age in one of three ways:

Upload their IDs, which are deleted within 30 days.

Record a video selfie that will be reviewed by Yoti, a company that uses facial analysis technology to estimate age and then deletes the video.

Ask three mutual followers who are at least 18 to confirm the users' age, an option Instagram calls social vouching.

The big picture: Apps are experimenting with methods of verifying ages beyond simply asking users to plug in a birthdate, as well as designing separate versions of their services for younger users.

Youth gaming platform Roblox in September announced a new age verification system requiring users to upload a photo ID and a selfie to prove they're real.

YouTube created a standalone app, YouTube Kids, for users under 13 while Facebook launched Messenger Kids for younger users.

TikTok created a view-only version of its video-sharing app for kids under 13, and removed 15 million underage accounts between October and December last year. The company removed 3.5 million suspected underage account during that same time period in 2020.

What they're saying: Erica Finkle, director of data governance at Instagram-parent Meta, told Axios the new age verification system is only for users attempting to edit their birthdate to make them older than 18 for now, but could be expanded in the future.

"We're focused on really providing age-appropriate experiences and so that's why we're starting with this as a test," Finkle said. "We will consider where across Meta technologies to use it going forward, but we want to test right now for effectiveness and how people are using it."

Instagram rolled out safety features for teenage users last year, including  making the accounts of users under 16 private by default.

The intrigue: Finkle said in a blog post the company still believes the best solution is for devices or App Stores to provide apps with users' ages, so they can have age-appropriate experiences across all apps. 

Earlier this month, Apple said with iOS 16, users will be able to use their digital ID in their Apple Wallet for apps requiring identity and age verification. 

Advocates of decentralization also see an opportunity for an identity to be stored in the blockchain, with users able to provide credentials to various applications and services.

Apple's iOS and Google's Android system allow parents to block or limit specific apps on their child's device.

Between the lines: Instagram requires users to be at least 13 years old, but has faced outcry from lawmakers over children's use of the app.

Meta in September said it was pausing development of a version of Instagram for kids under 12 after a Wall Street Journal investigation revealed internal research on Instagram's negative impact on teens.

Instagram head Adam Mosseri said at the time that a kid-friendly version of the app is better for parents than relying on an app's ability to verify the age of users who are too young to have an ID.

Our thought bubble: Even though a smartphone has more than enough info to verify who people are (and therefore how old they are), privacy and logistic concerns have made this a thorny issue.

Knowing the age of users is all the more important since some of the strictest rules on the internet are designed to regulate how websites treat children's data.

Instagram cracks down on young users who lie about their age

Instagram is the latest platform to launch new tools aimed at enforcing its age policies.

Illustration of the Instagram logo with a security hat and earpiece shining a flashlight forward

Instagram

Big Tech

Instagram is the latest platform to launch new tools aimed at enforcing its age policies, as kids&#x27; <a class="gtmContentClick" data-vars-link-text="screen time" data-vars-click-url="https://www.axios.com/2021/01/17/kids-screen-time-pandemic" data-vars-content-id="1932ec10-b8d1-4c0a-b841-e3a1f1dce306" data-vars-headline="Instagram cracks down on young users who lie about their age" data-vars-event-category="story" data-vars-sub-category="story" data-vars-item="in_content_link" href="https://www.axios.com/2021/01/17/kids-screen-time-pandemic" target="_self">screen time</a> rises and regulators threaten greater scrutiny of social media&#x27;s effects on children.Why it matters: Social media giants are grappling with how to <a class="gtmContentClick" data-vars-link-text="determine with certainty" data-vars-click-url="https://www.axios.com/2021/12/09/instagram-tik-tok-age-verification-child-safety" data-vars-content-id="1932ec10-b8d1-4c0a-b841-e3a1f1dce306" data-vars-headline="Instagram cracks down on young users who lie about their age" data-vars-event-category="story" data-vars-sub-category="story" data-vars-item="in_content_link" href="https://www.axios.com/2021/12/09/instagram-tik-tok-age-verification-child-safety" target="_self">determine with certainty</a> the age of their visitors to both evade regulatory crosshairs and create safer online experiences for children.

From the Valley to D.C., Big Tech players like Facebook, Google and Amazon are under more scrutiny than ever as new technology develops and privacy and antitrust concerns grow in lockstep with companies’ ambitions.

Technology

Privacy experts fear the Supreme Court's decision to overturn federal abortion rights will erode other key protections and expose daily life online to criminal investigations.

Why it matters: The federal right to an abortion provided by Roe v. Wade had its foundation in the conception of a personal right to privacy, broadly believed to cover everything from contraception use to same-sex marriage. 

The Supreme Court’s opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization opens the door to overturning those protections.

What they're saying: "I do think that there are very legitimate reasons not to trust that the rest of the conservative majority on the Supreme Court will only impact abortion and no other rights, including privacy," Caitlin Chin, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Axios.

"It's a very, very concerning landscape out there right now."

How it works: The Constitution does not explicitly guarantee a right to privacy, but court cases over the years have formed a sort of "penumbral" one (meaning a group of rights derived by implication from other rights), Margot Kaminski, a law professor at the University of Colorado, told Axios. The Roe ruling throws that into question.

The right to an abortion relies on the same 14th Amendment guarantee that provides the rights to contraceptives, interracial marriage and same-sex marriage, Eleni Manis, research director for Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, or STOP, told Axios.

"You can't have it one way and not the other," Manis said.

Reality check: The Supreme Court has largely not extended a right to privacy to include a right to data privacy.

Also, users theoretically give up many protections on their data once they agree to any service provider's terms.

What to watch: Much of daily life happens online, and if the Supreme Court continues down this path, that internet activity could become fodder for criminal investigations.

"We could see geofence warrants and keyword search warrants used in the same manner to prosecute individuals who, by living their lives, are committing acts that states may criminalize," Manis said.

Kaminski said it will not be difficult for law enforcement to prove "probable cause" that someone committed a crime related to one of many newly-enacted state abortion laws and get easy access to search a cell phone.

Yes, but: Tulane law professor and privacy expert Amy Gajda notes that Justice Samuel Alito acknowledged in the Dobbs opinion that privacy can be understood both as a right to avoid unwanted disclosure of information and as the right to make decisions without government interference.  

"The Court then deeply undermined that second sense of privacy but did not address the first," Gajda said.

The intrigue: The Dobbs decision may prompt tech companies to minimize the data they collect. It could also recharge Congress' effort to pass a national online privacy law.

A bipartisan privacy bill from House Energy & Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), ranking member Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and Senate Commerce ranking member Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) would provide heightened protections for location and health data and allow people to opt out of sharing information with data brokers.

The "My Body My Data Act" from Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) would limit the amount of data period-tracking apps can collect and require them to obtain permission from a user before sharing or selling that data. 

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and other Democrats recently introduced a bill that would ban data brokers from selling users' health data.

The future of privacy rights in a post-Roe world

Abortion rights were rooted in privacy rights. Now that Roe is overturned, other kinds of privacy may be at risk.

Illustration of a fingerprint with an @ symbol in the center

Roe v. Wade

Data privacy

Privacy experts fear the Supreme Court&#x27;s <a class="gtmContentClick" data-vars-link-text="decision to overturn" data-vars-click-url="https://www.axios.com/2022/06/24/roe-wade-decision-abortion" data-vars-content-id="5498cfd5-bf47-49ca-b73e-4c9254964e53" data-vars-headline="The future of privacy rights in a post-Roe world" data-vars-event-category="story" data-vars-sub-category="story" data-vars-item="in_content_link" href="https://www.axios.com/2022/06/24/roe-wade-decision-abortion" target="_self">decision to overturn</a> federal abortion rights will erode other key protections and expose daily life online to criminal investigations.Why it matters: The federal right to an abortion provided by Roe v. Wade had its foundation in the conception of a personal right to privacy, broadly believed to cover everything from contraception use to same-sex marriage.

Intel is postponing a groundbreaking ceremony to celebrate its planned $20 billion chip site in Ohio, as Congress stalls on passing a package meant to boost investment in the domestic semiconductor industry.

Why it matters: The delay signals Intel's frustration with Congress' lack of movement on the $52 billion in funding, which the company has said will impact its expansion.

Driving the news: Intel told Ohio lawmakers on Wednesday it was delaying the July 22 event "due in part to uncertainty around" the chips legislation, according to the Wall Street Journal, which first reported the news.

The company hasn't pushed back the start of construction and still plans to build, according to the Journal report.

An Intel spokesperson noted that when the company announced its Ohio project earlier this year, it said the "scope and pace of our expansion" will depend heavily on funding from Congress from the CHIPS Act.

What they're saying: "Unfortunately, CHIPS Act funding has moved more slowly than we expected and we still don’t know when it will get done," an Intel spokesperson said in a statement. 

"It is time for Congress to act so we can move forward at the speed and scale we have long envisioned for Ohio and our other projects to help restore U.S. semiconductor manufacturing leadership and build a more resilient semiconductor supply chain."

The big picture: Companies are stepping up the pressure on lawmakers to pass the legislation, now known as the Bipartisan Innovation Act, that includes the $52 billion in funding for domestic manufacturing.

The issue has increased urgency thanks to the pandemic-induced global chip shortage, with the Commerce Department warning earlier this year that U.S. companies relying on key chips have a five-day supply.

GlobalFoundries, which is exploring expanding a manufacturing site in New York, told the Washington Post that the funding would affect the rate and past it invests in increasing U.S. manufacturing capacity.

What's next: Lawmakers are working toward a compromise on House and Senate versions of the legislation as the August recess looms.

"Every day we waste by not passing the CHIPS Act funding is another day we fall further behind in our competition with China," Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), said in a statement. 

"This partisan gridlock has now caused a delay of a $20 billion economic shot in the arm for Ohio. It’s time our leaders in Washington find the courage to put aside their differences and ensure our country has a fighting chance at dominating the industries of the future.”

Go deeper: N.Y. business leaders push for federal chip funding

Columbus

A daily look at the most significant and interesting stories affecting Columbus. Written by Tyler Buchanan and Alissa Widman Neese.

Axios Columbus Thought Bubble

Columbus Alerts

Axios Columbus

Frustrated with Congress, Intel delays chips groundbreaking ceremony

Congress has stalled a package meant to boost investment in the domestic semiconductor industry.

Illustration of a US flag made of semiconductor chips.

CHIP funding

Intel is postponing a groundbreaking ceremony to celebrate its planned <a class="gtmContentClick" data-vars-link-text="$20 billion chip" data-vars-click-url="https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/newsroom/news/intel-announces-next-us-site-landmark-investment-ohio.html#gs.3vzq76" data-vars-content-id="e24364c6-dcd5-422c-afb5-8b6f7fbc75a2" data-vars-headline="Frustrated with Congress, Intel delays chips groundbreaking ceremony" data-vars-event-category="story" data-vars-sub-category="story" data-vars-item="in_content_link" href="https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/newsroom/news/intel-announces-next-us-site-landmark-investment-ohio.html#gs.3vzq76" target="_blank">$20 billion chip</a> site in Ohio, as Congress stalls on passing a package meant to boost investment in the domestic semiconductor industry.Why it matters: The delay signals Intel&#x27;s frustration with Congress&#x27; lack of movement on <a class="gtmContentClick" data-vars-link-text="the $52 billion in funding" data-vars-click-url="https://www.axios.com/2021/12/06/congress-usica-semiconductor-chips-pause" data-vars-content-id="e24364c6-dcd5-422c-afb5-8b6f7fbc75a2" data-vars-headline="Frustrated with Congress, Intel delays chips groundbreaking ceremony" data-vars-event-category="story" data-vars-sub-category="story" data-vars-item="in_content_link" href="https://www.axios.com/2021/12/06/congress-usica-semiconductor-chips-pause" target="_self">the $52 billion in funding</a>, which the company has said will impact its expansion.

Axios Login

Congress' delay on passing key funding for chips could jeopardize a big opportunity to keep one of America's few tech manufacturing industries.

Why it matters: It's expensive to build semiconductors — a vital input for wide swaths of the economy — and other countries have already outpaced the U.S. in incentivizing manufacturing on their shores.

Driving the news: News broke Thursday that Intel is delaying its groundbreaking ceremony for its planned $20 billion chip site in Ohio, citing in part uncertainty around chips legislation, as reported by The Wall Street Journal.

Intel says it still plans to build the site and has not pushed back the construction start date, but warned that the scope and pace of "our expansion in Ohio will depend heavily on funding" from Congress.  

Intel's announcement in January that it would build a leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing plant was cheered by the White House at the time as a sign of progress in the administration's efforts to increase domestic manufacturing.

State of play: The Senate passed the bipartisan U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, which includes $52 billion in funding for chips, last summer. The House passed its version of the bill in February, but the two chambers have yet to agree on a compromise bill.

Yes, but: The scope of Intel's plans — and that of other companies in the semiconductor industry — have hinged on whether or not Congress can inject $52 billion in funding to support manufacturing.

“Congress has both a historical and critically urgent opportunity to restore American leadership in the semiconductor industry by funding the CHIPS Act and enacting the Investment Tax Credit," Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron’s president and CEO, told Axios in a statement.

What they're saying: "Unfortunately, CHIPS Act funding has moved more slowly than we expected and we still don’t know when it will get done," an Intel spokesperson said in a statement.

Between the lines: Chip industry sources told Axios they are still optimistic that the money will eventually come through — which is in large part why companies  have moved forward with new projects. 

TSMC, Intel and Micron "all acted with some degree of faith this is going to move forward," said a source at one large chipmaker. 

However, the worry now is that partisan politics could push a bill past an August recess and into an unpredictable lame-duck session in December.

"One wonders what the consequences would be if Congress drops the ball and all these companies were left hanging," said the source.

The intrigue: A source at another major chipmaker says the issue remains vital to national security given that the U.S. is increasingly reliant on manufacturing from Asia, especially Taiwan.

"Commerce Secretary Raimondo calls it a crisis and she is right," the source said. "If you want to ensure U.S. national security, you need to manufacture the best chips here. That won’t happen if the (funding) doesn't pass."

Meanwhile: Other countries are pouncing on the opportunity. "Europe moved with some vigor to put their incentives out," noted the first source. "Other regions are being serious."

The big picture: Unlike some areas of manufacturing that would be practically impossible to do here, such as building an iPhone, domestic chipmaking is doable—and already done. 

But it is more expensive in the U.S., and the majority of the most advanced chips come from Taiwan, raising concerns of what could happen if that supply is jeopardized.

After a meeting Tuesday to discuss the bipartisan legislation's path forward, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a joint statement that Democrats believe "there is no reason that we should not pass this bill through Congress in July."

Chip makers warn Congress’ delay could threaten U.S. expansion

Other countries have already outpaced the U.S. in incentivizing manufacturing on their shores.

Illustration of a computer chip with a pause button in the center.  

Semiconductors

Congress&#x27; delay on passing key funding for chips could jeopardize a big opportunity to keep one of America&#x27;s few tech manufacturing industries.Why it matters: It&#x27;s expensive to build semiconductors — a vital input for wide swaths of the economy — and other countries have already outpaced the U.S. in incentivizing manufacturing on their shores.

When law enforcement authorities demand personal data belonging to those suspected of getting an abortion, tech firms will likely hand it over.

Why it matters: Companies like Google and Facebook collect enormous volumes of personal data, including information about where we've been, what we've bought, who we've talked to and what we've said. States that have made abortion a crime are making anyone who miscarries a potential target for a police data demand.

The big picture: The companies aren't directly answering questions about how they will respond to such inquiries now that the U.S. Supreme Court is letting states outlaw abortion. 

Yes, but: The firms' privacy policies and past conduct answer the question clearly: They may contest what they view as overly broad data requests, but generally they will cooperate with criminal investigations.

What's at stake: Period-tracking apps have drawn attention, for obvious reasons, but the potentially relevant data is far wider — everything from Amazon purchase data to Google search queries, and location data from cell carriers to messaging data from e-mail and chat providers.

How it works: Law enforcement already seeks access to location data, content, usernames, browser history and other online activity from tech companies through warrants or subpoenas. 

Now, they will seek that same information in connection with abortion investigations in states that have criminalized it, India McKinney, director of federal affairs for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Axios.

Driving the news: The Big Tech platforms haven't rushed to clarify how they will handle legal requests related to abortion prosecutions since the Dobbs decision on Friday. They were similarly silent when Axios posed the question after a draft ruling leaked in May.

But policies for the companies — including Apple, Google and Meta (Facebook) — clearly lay out how they handle such data requests.

"Like other technology and communications companies, Google regularly receives requests from governments and courts around the world to disclose user data," the company says in its privacy policy. "Our legal team reviews each and every request, regardless of type, and we frequently push back when a request appears to be overly broad or doesn’t follow the correct process."

Between the lines: There are a couple of reasons that companies are unlikely to confirm their plans and procedures.

The questions remain largely hypothetical for the moment, and there isn't much to be gained from tipping their hands.

Also, no company wants to prompt a headline saying that it intends to hand over personal data.

The intrigue: Law enforcement does not necessarily need a warrant to obtain some online information because it is sold by data brokers. 

"Even though the government could get a court order or a subpoena or a warrant to access data, at the moment, there are so many different channels for it to do so without going through that legal process," Caitlin Chin, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Axios.

Our thought bubble: The post-Roe world will drive every tech company to review the volume of data they are collecting and ask whether they need it, how it could be harmful, and how long they want to hold it.

Data minimization, already a trend and a principle espoused in the EU, becomes all the more important in the context of an increased volume of government requests aimed at enforcing laws that are opposed by a majority of the population. 

Apple has been the loudest advocate among large tech companies for limiting its own access to customer data. Google, which relies much more on data-driven ads, has also taken significant steps in recent years to make it easier to delete certain data.

"As long as the companies are collecting that data, and storing that data, they're going to keep getting subpoenaed," the EFF's McKinney said.

Another twist: Without clear standards for personal control of data, many people will simply delete period-tracking apps or think twice about seeking out health information online — at the moment that the change in laws makes access to reliable personal health data more urgent than ever.

"I think that people may cut themselves off from access to important reproductive health information that they need because of these privacy concerns," Chin said.

What's next: Activists are encouraging tech companies to take a fresh look at products they have in development to imagine the types of data they might generate and how that data could be used against a customer's interest by an intrusive government.

"Privacy is a time-shifted risk, meaning, what is convenient and risk-free today can have devastating consequences tomorrow," Human Rights Watch's Frederike Kaltheuner wrote after Friday's ruling. "We should design the technologies we depend on in ways that protect us — no matter the political climate."

Tech companies may surrender abortion-related data

It's not just about period-tracking apps. Personal data of all kinds will become a battleground in the post-Roe world.

Illustration of a red cross as a share icon. 

Abortion

When law enforcement authorities demand personal data belonging to those suspected of getting an abortion, tech firms will likely hand it over.Why it matters: Companies like Google and Facebook collect enormous volumes of personal data, including information about where we&#x27;ve been, what we&#x27;ve bought, who we&#x27;ve talked to and what we&#x27;ve said. States that have made abortion a crime are making anyone who miscarries a potential target for a police data demand.

Sections

Axios Local

Axios gets you smarter, faster with news & information that matters.

About

Subscribe

Margaret Harding McGill

Stories

The future of privacy rights in a post-Roe world

Tech companies may surrender abortion-related data

Chip makers warn Congress’ delay could threaten U.S. expansion

Frustrated with Congress, Intel delays chips groundbreaking ceremony

Instagram cracks down on young users who lie about their age