Social media ID laws: A looming disaster for Americans?

Gandalf_The_Grey · May 18, 2023

Arkansas has just become the second US state after Utah to pass an age verification law for social media, requiring social media sites to work with third-party vendors to verify the age of new users. But while the Utah law does not go into effect until 2024, the Arkansas law, though fresh out of the legislative oven, will go into effect already this September. The law aims to protect children from social media harms, but it will affect all new users regardless of age, since everyone’s age will have to be checked to enforce it in earnest.

With several other states like Ohio, Minnesota, and Connecticut eyeing similar bills, let’s take a quick look at the Arkansas Social Media Safety Act — a trailblazing law whose implementation could set a precedent for others.

Identity theft: the hidden danger of the bill

Under the law, both a social media site and a third party vendor are prohibited from retaining a person’s identifying information after the access to the platform has been granted. And if they are found to have “knowingly” retained that information, they become liable for damages.

However, we cannot rule out the possibility that some social media sites or third parties may inadvertently or intentionally retain sensitive identification data and even seek to profit from it. There is no shortage of examples where social media apps misrepresented their data collection practices, or promised that certain information would be collected for one purpose and then ended up using it for another purpose. For example, Snapchat previously claimed that it needed the user’s phone number just to help them find their friends on the app, when in fact it was harvesting information about all contacts from the user’s address books. Facebook and Twitter separately claimed that they collected users’ phone numbers only for security purposes, when in fact they were repurposing them for targeted advertising. These are just a few examples of how information can be mishandled. It can also be leaked either from within the company or as a result of a breach.

When it comes to protecting children from the dark side of social media, we are not in favor of blanket bans or policies that carry huge privacy and security risks and questionable benefits. It’s true that we as adults have a responsibility to protect children from the harmful effects of social media, but there are other ways to do it. We can lead by example, talk to our kids about social media, including both its benefits and risks (without painting everything black), and make good use of the privacy settings that are available. The key is to have a good rapport with the child, because given how tech-smart kids are these days, they are likely to find a way around the restrictions anyway.

Social media ID laws: A looming disaster for Americans?

A wave of social media age verification laws is about to sweep the US, with Arkansas and Utah leading the way. The privacy implications of these laws are serious. Is it too high a price to pay to protect children?

adguard.com

vtqhtr413 · Jun 15, 2023

Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed a bill Tuesday banning kids under 18 from joining a wide variety of social media sites without parental consent.
The bill, HB 18, requires social media companies to receive explicit consent from a minor’s parent or guardian before they’d be allowed to create their own accounts starting in September of next year. It also forces these companies to prevent children from seeing “harmful” content — like content related to eating disorders, substance abuse, or “grooming” — by creating new filtering systems.

Texas’ definition of a “digital service” is extremely broad. Under the law, parental consent would be necessary for kids trying to access nearly any site that collects identifying information, like an email address. There are some exceptions, including sites that primarily deliver educational or news content and email services. The Texas attorney general could sue companies found to have violated this law.
The law’s requirements to filter loosely defined “harmful material” and provide parents with control over their child’s accounts mirror language in some federal legislation that has spooked civil and digital rights groups.