The Law Should Not Require Parental Consent for All Minors to Access Social Media

[bigheadfred]

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/05/law-should-not-require-parental-consent-all-minors-access-social-media

The Law Should Not Require Parental Consent for All Minors to Access Social Media

DEEPLINKS BLOG
BY JASON KELLEY
MAY 12, 2023

Numerous state laws passed this year, and bills proposed in Congress, would set onerous new restrictions on what young people can do online, depriving teenagers of their First Amendment rights to express themselves, access protected speech, engage in anonymous speech, and participate in online communities. They also enforce a presumption that parents of minors do not want them accessing social media. These laws would require people under a certain age, usually 18, to obtain parental consent before making an account on some of the most popular platforms on the planet, many of which are useful for young people to access educational resources, community, political speech, and more. In doing so, they would also violate the same core First Amendment rights of people of all ages by requiring identification to access important global platforms.

Utah and Arkansas  have already passed such laws. When they go into effect in March 2024 and September 2023, respectively, anyone under eighteen will be required to obtain parental consent before accessing social media. The same would be true nationally under the Protecting Kids on Social Media Act, which was recently introduced in Congress. And though it doesn’t directly require parental consent for social media, the Kids Online Safety Act, too, would require platforms to implement “parental supervision” tools that would force them to verify child-parent relationships. Once the Utah and Arkansas laws are in effect, young people will not be able to access social media using a login without a complicated approval process that would require parents and guardians to share their private information with social media platforms or third-party verification services.

More at link.

[bigheadfred]

Something to chew on if you are inclined @roamer_1 .

[bigheadfred]

DeSantis Approves Social Media Ban For Kids Under 14 In Florida: What To Know

Topline
Children in Florida under 14 will no longer be allowed to make accounts on social media platforms beginning Jan. 1, 2025, under a new law signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis Monday, weeks after he vetoed a more restrictive proposal.

~snip~

Chief Critic

Net Choice, a technology industry group, slammed the measure’s passage, calling it “unconstitutional.” “HB 3 in effect will impose an ‘I.D. for the Internet’ on any Floridian who wants to use an online service—no matter their age,” the group said in a statement.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/desantis-approves-social-media-ban-for-kids-under-14-in-florida-what-to-know/ar-BB1kvzNb

[DCPatriot]

Something to chew on if you are inclined @roamer_1 .

I believe this is a huge mistake.

These little sons-a-bitches will be of voting age come 2028.

First they pissed off the women repealing Roe V Wade...now they're pissing off the kids, locking them out with a stroke of a pen.

The bill is going to come due in a few years and it's going to be very 'expensive'.

We're bleeped.

[roamer_1]

DeSantis Approves Social Media Ban For Kids Under 14 In Florida: What To Know

Topline
Children in Florida under 14 will no longer be allowed to make accounts on social media platforms beginning Jan. 1, 2025, under a new law signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis Monday, weeks after he vetoed a more restrictive proposal.

~snip~


Chief Critic

Net Choice, a technology industry group, slammed the measure’s passage, calling it “unconstitutional.” “HB 3 in effect will impose an ‘I.D. for the Internet’ on any Floridian who wants to use an online service—no matter their age,” the group said in a statement.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/desantis-approves-social-media-ban-for-kids-under-14-in-florida-what-to-know/ar-BB1kvzNb

Yahoo did it not long ago... As a matter of course, because anyone under 18 cannot legally bind a contract.

[roamer_1]

I believe this is a huge mistake.

These little sons-a-bitches will be of voting age come 2028.

First they pissed off the women repealing Roe V Wade...now they're pissing off the kids, locking them out with a stroke of a pen.

The bill is going to come due in a few years and it's going to be very 'expensive'.

We're bleeped.

Not when them kids have kids of their own. All of mine censor their networks ad won't even let their kids online except for a few hours at night. And my brother's clan is stricter yet. The internet is a shithole full of man eating alligators. Protecting kids from that is natural.

[DCPatriot]

Not when them kids have kids of their own. All of mine censor their networks ad won't even let their kids online except for a few hours at night. And my brother's clan is stricter yet. The internet is a shithole full of man eating alligators. Protecting kids from that is natural.

Eighteen year olds are liberals.  Not until they have children of their own and mortgages to pay...businesses to run do they become Conservatives.  By that time, this Republic will be extinct.

For once in your miserable life...get your head out your ass!  PLEASE??  I BEG YOU!!  You contrarian nutcase.   

[Smokin Joe]

Eighteen year olds are liberals.  Not until they have children of their own and mortgages to pay...businesses to run do they become Conservatives.  By that time, this Republic will be extinct.

For once in your miserable life...get your head out your ass!  PLEASE??  I BEG YOU!!  You contrarian nutcase.   

Why are 18 year olds liberals, aside from wanting to grow up too fast? From a response to all the hormones of Puberty and being willing to say/think almost anything to get laid?
That's how you get skinny little know-nothings with heads full of communist propaganda running around hating on everyone, including themselves, burning down police stations and hiding behind umbrellas.
Might cut down on some of the juvie flash mobs of looters, too.
A significant part of that comes from all the brain addling crap they pick up on social media.

When movies carry warnings warning of depictions of (EGAD!!) smoking! but the social media posts are using language beyond PG-13, maybe it is time to limit their exposure.

Don't give them access to the Communist propaganda.
Make 'em read, something relatively wholesome. (Get 'em a subscription to Hustler, maybe./s)

[roamer_1]

Eighteen year olds are liberals.  Not until they have children of their own and mortgages to pay...businesses to run do they become Conservatives.  By that time, this Republic will be extinct.

For once in your miserable life...get your head out your ass!  PLEASE??  I BEG YOU!!  You contrarian nutcase.   

Yeah, no doubt, if you've let em be on TikTok all their life.
It works a little different when you don't. Most of my clan is Conservative. My elder sister and all hers are liberal and back east. The rest of us tend Conservative or Libertarian... to include most the children and young folks.

[roamer_1]

kids with responsibilities grow up Conservative natively.

[unite for individuality]

Numerous state laws passed this year, and bills proposed in Congress, would set onerous new restrictions on what young people can do online, depriving teenagers of their First Amendment rights to express themselves, access protected speech, engage in anonymous speech, and participate in online communities.

Whenever anyone talks about people's rights,
it's always presumed that we're talking about RESPONSIBLE ADULTS.
In the case of minors, parents have CUSTODY.
It is the PARENTS who have all the rights!

These people who are caterwauling about "teenagers' rights" -
do they also advocate Second Amendment rights for those same teens?

One thing about this does concern me -
the idea that this could be a backdoor way of requiring an I.D.
for anyone to see the internet,
and the possibility of using that I.D. to track everything everyone sees.

[DefiantMassRINO]

It's just Nanny State legislation authored by "conservatives".

It's ironic that the people who don't want the Government to mandate Covid shots have no issue with Government issuing family planning and parenting mandates.

 

How long before "conservatives" pass mandates that everyone must write using their right hand, because the left hand is the Devil's Hand?

Oh, yes, "conservatives", please give us more Nanny Government to protect us from 'evil'.

[roamer_1]

One thing about this does concern me -
the idea that this could be a backdoor way of requiring an I.D.
for anyone to see the internet,
and the possibility of using that I.D. to track everything everyone sees.[/size]

That is already the case. I try to tell folks that all the time. There is a modicum of privacy, but it does not extend all that far., mostly governed by folks not caring what you do.

Believe me, if I know your locality and would have reason to bear a grudge, I could likely find you out. And certainly LEOs could do so with ease.

That is not altogether true. If you use a laptop from anonymous sources (coffee shops, drive-by wifi, etc), and have avoided cameras, it is technically possible to remain anonymous - But even that is narrowing wrt the way machine serials are organized and used to authenticate your machine, which means the trail to you owning that machine is likely a way to track you.

Forget about it with phones. Your ID is locked to !YOU! and your phone talks promiscuously about your activities to many entities.

[Polly Ticks]

Forget about it with phones. Your ID is locked to !YOU! and your phone talks promiscuously about your activities to many entities.

I took a photo on my phone of something on the TV screen so I would remember to go look it up later, but never did.  The next day, I got an ad for that very product on my FB page.  Coincidences are bollocks.

[roamer_1]

I took a photo on my phone of something on the TV screen so I would remember to go look it up later, but never did.  The next day, I got an ad for that very product on my FB page.  Coincidences are bollocks.

That's right.