Shifting Perspectives on Big Tech and Child Safety
For quite a while now, the Internet has been treated as if it’s the Wild West in terms of free speech, with the assumption that there should be minimal oversight. This has led to two troubling beliefs regarding Big Tech: that these platforms can publish nearly anything without facing repercussions, and that technology companies can shape their services however they want—letting users walk away whenever they choose.
Currently, courts, parents, and state governments are starting to challenge these notions.
We are increasingly aware of the fallout that comes with a completely hands-off approach in the digital realm. Jonathan Haidt notes in his book, The Anxious Generation, that since smartphones and social media became widely used around 2012, instances of anxiety, depression, loneliness, self-harm, and suicide among teenagers—particularly girls—have surged.
In fact, the rate of major depressive episodes among teenage girls nearly doubled in ten years, while the number of emergency room visits for self-harm has skyrocketed. Parents have been vigilant about their children’s physical safety, yet have overlooked their digital behaviors.
As Haidt points out, children are becoming “overprotected in the real world and overexposed online,” leading to a lack of autonomy offline and constant access to harmful content.
This hands-off strategy toward Big Tech is not just about online content. We’ve also allowed for the belief that if a consumer dislikes a product, they should simply switch to something else. If you’re unhappy with informal practices like shadowbanning, just find a different app. However, courts around the nation are starting to show that these assumptions might not hold firm.
This year alone, a California jury ordered Meta and YouTube to pay a family $3 million due to the harm caused by their addictive platforms. A New Mexico jury also mandated that Meta pay $375 million for misleading and endangering younger users. Recently, a significant lawsuit in Kentucky with concerns over addiction and mental health concerns was settled. My Attorney General in South Dakota is also taking a stand, asserting that Meta must take responsibility for its actions.
The outcomes of these legal battles are illuminating. Companies can’t argue a free market shield when it comes to creating and selling whatever they choose. The online space isn’t merely a venue for free speech where consent is the only requirement.
So, what steps can we take to rein in Big Tech and safeguard the next generation?
As parents, it’s crucial to critically evaluate what kinds of access we’re providing our children. “The Tech Exit,” authored by Claire Morell, highlights the detrimental effects of excessive screen time and offers practical recommendations for families to undertake a 30-day digital detox.
Her suggestions can serve as a valuable resource for parents aiming to enhance their children’s experiences after engaging with The Anxious Generation. Postponing smartphone access until kids are older, reinforcing safety measures, and defining clearer boundaries for tech use can yield significant benefits.
While families bear the primary responsibility for managing childhood experiences, government entities also have a vital role. It shouldn’t be solely up to individual families to ensure that multimillion-dollar tech firms adhere to the law; that’s where the government comes in.
Legislators ought to advocate for protections like the App Store Accountability Act (ASAA). This initiative is straightforward: tech firms shouldn’t directly form legal contracts with minors.
The proposed bill would require age verification for app stores, mandate that companies contract with parents rather than children, and ensure that age ratings are transparent, so families are aware of what their kids are downloading. It would also strengthen the enforcement of COPPA, the federal law that forbids collecting personal information from children under 13 without parental consent, which has already gained backing from over 170 family advocacy organizations across the nation.
Moreover, Congress should consider legislation like the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), championed by Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee and Majority Leader John Thune from South Dakota. This proposal represents a significant stride toward enhancing protection for youth online with essential safeguards.
Default settings would automatically activate safety features without parents needing to hunt for them, while also including anti-addiction measures that allow parents to disable manipulative design elements and algorithms. KOSA aims to streamline the process for identifying and reporting harmful content, and it should also encompass the discussion about harmful chatbots.
While it’s essential to think about these protections in our digital era, we cannot forget the time-honored adage that “the government closest to the people serves them best.”
During recent deliberations around artificial intelligence regulations, there were concerns about a potential national moratorium—which thankfully didn’t come to pass, allowing states to act independently.
As discussions around this legislation progress, it’s crucial that Congress resists any attempts by Big Tech to propose similar moratoriums. The federal government must take decisive action while allowing state legislatures to implement measures suited to their unique contexts.
These actions represent some of the best ways to protect children from predatory practices employed by Big Tech and empower parents to foster the meaningful, real-world connections that every child deserves.
