Critics warn social media ban goes too far, could ban YouTube, Wikipedia
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Lindsey Bailey/Axios
The Massachusetts House wants the Commonwealth to become the most restrictive state in the country for young people on the Internet, but some worry the bill goes much too far.
Why it matters: Critics argue the House's bill trades child safety for a surveillance state and may accidentally ban platforms children use every day.
State of play: Legislation passed this week by the House would ban cell phones from schools and require social media platforms to verify user ages.
- Mass. residents could be forced to submit government IDs, facial scans or even biometric data to tech companies to prove their age, according to state Reps. Erika Uyterhoeven and Mike Connolly, the only Democrats who voted against the bill.
The big picture: The bill defines a social media platform as any online service that "displays content primarily generated by users and allows users to create, share and view user-generated content with other users."
- Digital rights group Fight for the Future warns the definition is so broad it could sweep up nearly the entire internet, including Wikipedia and other sites with user-generated content.
- The bill does not single out individual social networks or websites and would instruct the state attorney general to come up with more specific regulations.
Between the lines: Opponents argue the bill's vague language puts platforms popular with minors far beyond Facebook and Instagram in the crosshairs.
- Even YouTube could fit the bill's definition, as its model centers on user-created and shared videos.
- Roblox — built around users creating, sharing and playing games together — could also qualify.
What they're saying: "What distinguishes the big tech social media companies from the rest of the internet is not actually very clear," Harvard Law School cybersecurity and online privacy lecturer Timothy Edgar told Axios.
- "We need to think very carefully about the ramifications of what that would mean for innovation on the internet and what that would mean for the openness and freedoms that we all enjoy," he said.
LGBTQ+ advocates warn against the bill's parental data-access provisions, such as letting parents of 14- and 15-year-olds request their children's submitted data.
- They say that risks outing queer youth to unsupportive families.
- The House added an amendment to the bill barring platforms from sharing data tied to a minor's LGBTQ+ status, but opponents maintain the core parental system is still dangerous.
Zoom out: A coalition of 90 civil rights and privacy organizations says the age-verification system the bill would rely on would be vulnerable to breaches.
- Federal judges have blocked similar laws in Florida, Louisiana and Ohio on First Amendment grounds.
What's next: The bill is in the hands of the Senate, which passed its own bill last year, focusing exclusively on removing cell phones from classrooms.
- The Senate could accept, strip out or renegotiate the House's social media mandates before any bill reaches Gov. Maura Healey's desk.