A new law, signed by Republican Governor Mike DeWine in July, is considered as a way to safeguard children’s mental health, citing concerns about the intentionally addictive nature of social media.

  • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    11 months ago

    Anytime someone’s claim is the protection of children, you should apply a VERY heavy dose of scepticism and scrutiny.

      • regul@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        If you take it at face value, which you should really never do when conservatives are involved.

        By my estimation, this (and bills like it) are intended to do two things:

        1. Reduce younger people’s access to points of view outside of the US political mainstream. In particular, Republican politicians seem very convinced that TikTok is turning kids gay/trans/atheist/communist/etc.
        2. Allow for aggrieved conservatives to extract money via lawsuit from corporations Republican politicians view as hostile to them. Because laws like this will obviously be circumvented, and these laws are written such that the platform is liable in these cases, these laws open them up to potentially millions of lawsuits every time a teenager gets an Instagram account.
      • JCPhoenix@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Doesn’t COPPA already require this for children under 13? This state bill raises it to under 16.

        I guess it comes down to the particulars. Is there something more onerous in the Ohio bill than in COPPA? Because I don’t think I’ve heard of any company seriously getting mad that COPPA is a thing.

        • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          You’d think if it was they’d be pointing to that.

          As far as I’m concerned “you must have parental consent until 18” is perfectly legitimate, because you can’t really sign contracts or fully legally consent until then.

  • Great Blue Heron@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    11 months ago

    Protecting children would mean knowing which users are children, which would mean knowing the actual legal identity of every user of the platform. It’s never going to happen.

    • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      You don’t think that the data the companies collect and analyse from their users don’t already give them a decent idea? How do you think targeted advertising works?