California lawmakers have amended
A.B. 1709
, but the core problem remains: the bill is still a
ban on social media access for youth under 16
, and it still threatens the
privacy
and
First Amendment
rights of all Californians.
Proponents of the bill may argue that the recent amendments represent a
compromise
, but a close look at the text shows no major changes. As the bill moves forward in the Senate, we must continue to urge lawmakers to vote NO.
Take Action: Tell Your Senator to OPPOSE A.B. 1709
A "Compromise" That Still Denies Access
Under the newly amended Section 22683, platforms are prohibited from offering "addictive features" to users under 16. A platform can allow a minor to keep an account only if it strips away these features, which include what the bill calls "addictive feeds," auto-play, and anything else the Attorney General designates in future rulemaking.
However, the bill defines "addictive feeds" so broadly that it covers virtually every functional recommendation algorithm. The bill applies this label to any presentation of user-generated content recommended "in whole or in part, on information provided by the user." That includes basic inputs like who a user follows, what posts they like, or their self-expressed interests. By calling these basic tools and features “addictive," the bill also makes broad conclusions about the
unsettled science
behind social media use, youth, and addiction.
Because almost every major social media service uses automated feeds to deliver content, the end result of AB 1709 remains the same: young people under 16 will be denied access to major social media services as they currently exist.
Even if a platform attempts to comply by stripping away recommendation systems for minors, this still violates the First Amendment. Recommendation systems are the primary tools that users rely on to find speech and disseminate their own. Forcing young people onto a stripped-down, dysfunctional version of social
… [more]
