New York passes bill banning social media from using 'addictive' recommendation algorithms for under-18s



On Friday, June 7, 2024, the New York State Assembly passed a bill that would ban social media platforms from using addictive recommendation algorithms against children.

New York passes legislation that would ban 'addictive' social media algorithms for kids

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/new-york-passes-legislation-ban-addictive-social-media-algorithms-kids-rcna155470



Prodded by fed up parents, some in Congress try to get curb kids to use social media - Nextgov/FCW
https://www.nextgov.com/policy/2024/06/prodded-fed-parents-some-congress-try-curb-kids-use-social-media/397204/

The New York State Assembly passed the Stop Addictive Feeds Exploitation (SAFE) for Kids act, which prohibits social media platforms like TikTok and Instagram from serving content to users under the age of 18 based on recommendation algorithms. The act would force social media companies to serve feeds in reverse chronological order to child users.

The SAFE Act prohibits 'addictive feeds' that recommend, select, or prioritize media based on information related to the user or their device, as they may have a negative impact on children's mental health. Companies found to be in violation of the law will be required to fix the problem within 30 days or face damages of up to $5,000 (approximately 785,000 yen) for each user under the age of 18.

The SAFE Act had a provision that would have prohibited platforms from sending notifications to children between the hours of midnight and 6 a.m., but this provision was removed when the bill was amended.



Laws like the SAFE Act that restrict children's use of social media are gaining popularity in the United States, and in May 2024,

a bill similar to the SAFE Act (CAADCA) passed the California State Senate. The US government is also working on enacting the Kids Online Safety Act .

NetChoice , a trade group representing major technology and social media companies including Google, Meta, and TikTok, has challenged several state laws over the past two years as violating the First Amendment, including California's CAADCA, which is similar to the SAFE Act, in court, arguing that it is unconstitutional.

NetChoice isn't the only one to be critical of legislative policing of social media. 'When you can position something as something that's protecting kids, it automatically has more political clout,' said Evan Greer, director of Fight for the Future , a nonprofit digital rights advocacy group.



On the other hand, there are many people who support the SAFE Act. The SAFE Act is supported mainly by parents, some of whom have children who have reportedly committed suicide after viewing harmful content on social media. In fact, Julie Scelfo, a former reporter for The New York Times, founded Mothers Against Media Addiction (MAMA) and supports the SAFE Act.

'We are in the midst of a national youth mental health emergency, and it's crystal clear that one of the biggest causes is social media and its addictive algorithms,' Scelfo said. 'It's not a problem with social media per se, it's a problem with addictive design that allows kids' emotions to be exploited for profit.'

The SAFE Act was introduced by Democratic Assemblyman Andrew Gournades and has received bipartisan support from more than 20 state senators in the New York State Assembly. However, civil rights advocates, including Greer, have argued that the SAFE Act tramples on the rights of companies and users, and that 'strong privacy and antitrust laws' should be considered.

'Courts have actually been clear that they can regulate commercial surveillance practices by companies, and they can regulate particularly harmful business practices like autoplay and infinite scrolling,' Greer said. 'We can't let the government control what young people can and can't see online, because that would be a content issue and would violate the First Amendment.' 'When a state passes a law that induces companies to use intrusive age verification that is incompatible with anonymity, it actually creates human rights issues around the world. There is broad agreement among human rights experts that the ability to speak and to use the internet anonymously and privately is a fundamental human right that must be protected, because it is so important to the most vulnerable and marginalized people on the planet.'

in Web Service, Posted by logu_ii