Congress Aims to Pass First Laws to Protect Children Online Since Before the iPhone Was Created
Credit: Thought Catalog / Unsplash
Toggle Dark Mode
Last Thursday, the Senate overwhelmingly approved two bills designed to protect children online, voting 86-1 in favor of the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy and Protection Act and the Kids Online Safety Act (COPPA 2.0 and KOSA).
The Senate is hopeful the House of Representatives will vote to approve the laws before the end of the congressional session in January. The House is currently on recess until September. However, big tech companies, digital rights groups, and even the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have vowed to fight the bills should they pass, claiming the bills threaten online rights and free speech.
About COPPA 2.0 and KOSA
The Children and Teens’ Online Privacy and Protection Act 2.0 extends protections for children under 13 to children under 16. It’s an updated version of the original Children and Teens’ Online Privacy and Protection Act passed in 1998.
COPPA 2.0 seeks to address increasing concerns about how tech companies handle the data of young users in light of the rising mental health issues linked to online content and data practices. Beyond extending the age of those children covered under the bill, it prohibits targeted advertising, requires parental consent before collecting data from children aged 13-16, and includes an “eraser button” that allows parents and teens to delete personal information. The bill would also establish a new enforcement arm known as the Youth Marketing and Privacy Division at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
While COPPA 2.0 focuses more on targeted advertising and data collection, KOSA, the Kids Online Safety Act, seeks to enhance safety measures on online platforms like Facebook and Instagram. KOSA would require platforms to implement measures that mitigate risk of harm to children, strengthen parental controls and transparency into data collection, data privacy and usage, and require platforms to conduct annual independent audits to review their safety measures. These audit reports would be publicly available.
The Resistance
The primary challenge to these bills comes from a tech industry trade association called NetChoice. NetChoice members include X (Twitter), Snap, Pinterest, Meta (Facebook and Instagram), Google, Amazon, and Netflix.
While proponents of the bills claim they pass constitutional muster, NetChoice sees things differently. Carl Szabo, NetChoice VP & General Counsel, states that while Congress has good intentions, the proposed legislation could have some chilling effects on parental rights and free speech.
KOSA fails to meet basic constitutional principles and fails parents because it won’t make a single child safer online or address their concerns. Taking away parents’ and guardians’ authority and choice, while forcing them to give up their and their children’s personal information to access and engage in free speech, is both dangerous and a violation of their rights.
The Chamber of Progress and other pro-LGBTQ groups have raised concerns that the bills would be used to target LGBTQ content. Republican Senator Marsha Blackburn, a lead co-sponsor for KOSA, said in an interview with Family Policy Alliance, a conservative Christian organization, “protecting minor children from the transgender in this culture and that influence” is part of the spirit behind the bills.
Jason Kelly, Activism Director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), expressed more direct concerns as to how the bills will be enforced and practical concerns for adults. Kelly warned: “It would put the tools of censorship in the hands of state attorneys general, and would greatly endanger the rights, and safety, of young people online. And KOSA’s burdens would affect adults, too, who will likely face hurdles to accessing legal content online as a result of the bill.”
While there seems to be broad agreement as to the importance of protecting minors online, there’s little consensus on how to achieve it. Online content moderation and freedom of speech are necessarily complex issues. Is the goal of the government to broadly control access to information online and a direct threat to free speech? It’s possible.
On the other hand, it’s reasonable that federal laws preempting state laws on online safety free corporations from having to comply with a patchwork of laws. One interesting note: Senator Rand Paul, the lone vote against the bills, called them a “Pandora’s box for censorship.” We’ll keep you informed as things evolve.
