Ritika Shroff had a typical gene experience with social media. At the age of 13 she enrolled in Instagram and then Snapchat. Later, she downloaded a tiktok and went through other popular platforms.
But in high school, she began to see flaws, feeling pressure, comparing the number of followers, test results and experience with the distinctions of her peers online.
“They do x, y and with their lives and I think I have been drawn into it,” said Shroff.
Today, Shroff, a 19-year-old second-year student at the American University in Washington, still sees the benefits of social media, such as allowing her to stay in touch with friends from the hometown of the hometown of des Mines, Iowa and Family in India. Although he believes that there should be more rules in social media, he does not believe that individual state activities, such as the Platform’s lawsuit state, would have a great impact.
“These little things will not affect the wider landscape,” said Shroff.
More states hope to limit the damage that social media can cause mental health and privacy of teenagers, approving the provisions requiring the verification of the age or consent of parents, prohibit “addictive channels” or prohibit applications for minors. They also take social media companies to court.
But some experts say that such efforts will not make social media safer. Instead, they are afraid that movements may violate the privacy of people and the right to the first amendment – and potentially hinders for all platforms.
“These are global media and an attempt to regulate them at the micro level … The fear of many people is that we will end with different principles for different states, which will simply undermine all the promise and potential of online media and communication,” said Kevin Goldberg with Freedom Forum, non-profit organization aimed at protecting the rights to the first amendment.
Some disputes in social media play at federal level. Last week, the United States Supreme Court maintained bilateral federal law prohibiting Tiktok, a popular video sharing platform, unless the Chinese parent company agreed to sell the application. The prohibition briefly entered into force before President Donald Trump, who unsuccessfully tried to prohibit Tiktoku on the basis of an executive order in the first term, signed an executive order delay It’s for the next 75 days.
But without other federal actions to limit the impact of social media on teenage people, many states are considering new regulations. In New York A law The adopted in June prohibits social media platforms to provide minors with so -called addictive channels without parental consent. Prosecutor General New York Letitia James, Democrat, prepares formal rules to enforce the law.
He noticed the channels in social media so that the children were quickly rewinding to boost advertising revenues, noticed the state democratic senator Andrew Gounardes, who sponsors Bill. He argued that children addicted to social media suffer from mental health problems, and people who spend more time changing relationships.
“So social media, for all positives that may exist, have some real, deeply negative and dark flaws, which we finally see the manifesto, and we must reconcile it,” said Gounardes.
But technological developers are concerned about the new state regulations may weaken the protection of privacy for users, remove online mental health resources for marginalized communities and limit the flow of information online, said Paul Lekas, senior vice president and head of global public policy and government matters at the Software and Information Industry Association, Trade Association representing the digital content industry.
“The bills are different, so it’s hard to say that they are all good or all of them,” said Lekas. “But many fears appear in many of these bills.”
Age limitations
Some studies suggest that excessive Using social media It worsens the mental health of teenage people. According to teenagers who spend the most time on social media. vote.
Florida law This month, he prohibits children who are less than 14 years ancient, having social media accounts. A user who is 14 or 15 years ancient would have to obtain parental consent before starting the account.
Ashley Moody, then a republican prosecutor general, agreed not to enforce the law while lawsuit Claiming that this would limit the freedom of juvenile words. Moody was sworn in to the US Senate this week to replace Senator Marco Rubio, the new Secretary of State of the USA.
More funds are expected throughout the country during legislative sessions in 2025.
New account in Indiana He would forbid everyone under 16, creating social media accounts without verified parental consent. A similar bill has been entered in Nebragabut with an age limit of 18. Nevada He would set the age to 13.
To verify age, some applications may require all users to send a photo of their identifier. This may be special fears for adult users who would have full legal identity related to social media account, said Ash Johnson, senior politics manager at Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, Think Tank focused on public policy.
Johnson said that instead of a direct ban on social media accounts for users at a certain age, increasing transparency and responsibility for social media programmers improved the security of the application.
As an example, she pointed to California. The Act on the Design Code was partly appropriate for age blocked from the federal court enforcement last year. This would require companies to make sure that online services can access children to eliminate the risk of their damage.
Johnson said that parental controls can also facilitate parents supervise the presence of a child’s media by deciding to what content they can access.
New on Instagram Teen accounts,
“It would give children a really configurable experience in social media depending on their individual development needs,” said Johnson.
Many regulations throughout the country are specially designed to prevent younger people from accessing some online content or entire social media platforms, said Goldberg with the Freedom Forum. Changing the way social media programmers control who can and cannot have an account can change what people see on their channels.
“We saw a lot of it, especially at the state level, which is disturbing,” he said. “Many rights that we see the proposed – and even adopted – raise concerns about the first amendment.”
States go to court
States also turn to lawsuits to resolve the influence in social media on teenage people.
In October General Prosecutors in California, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisians, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, North Karolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Vermont, Washington and the Colombia district defendant Tiktok, accusing violations of state provisions regarding consumer protection.
Rights, led by the Prosecutor General of Democratic California, Rob Bont and James from New York, claim that Tiktok uses and harms teenage users and cheats public opinion about the threats of the social media platform.
The Prosecutor General of the Republican in Texas Ken Paxton filed a similar lawsuit in the same month, accusing the Tiktok of violation State law Protection of children online. The law prohibits digital service providers to disclose, disclose or sell personal data of a minor without the consent of the parent.
Tiktok questioned the claims, calling them “inaccurate and misleading” in Statement to CNN. The company claims that its platform is unthreatening for children and offers time restrictions and parental controls.
You also aimed at Snapchat and Meta. In September, the Prosecutor General of Nowy Mexico Raúl Torrez, Democrat, submitted complaint Against Snap Inc., the dominant company of Snapchat, claiming that the application programmers ignored the reports about Sextorion, without implementing the rules of age verification, admitting functions that combine minors with adults and more.
In 2023 more than 40 states The finish line, claiming that Instagram and Facebook have worsened the crisis in the field of mental health of teenage people.
Julie Scelfo, social media companies must be held responsible founder Mothers against media.
Scelfo, a career journalist who had been involved in the mental health of teenage people for years, said that she disturbed her, that more and more teenage children want to commit suicide, because social media became more main.
“Social media can combine people to obtain positive things, but it was also a very convenient channel for all the worst forces in society,” said Scelfo.
But technology companies win fights – and the offensive continues.
In addition to the partial block of the Act on the Design Code, appropriate for age, federal judge blocked Until February 1, another law of California aimed at protecting children from addictive channels. The Act on the protection of our children against social media addiction would prevent social media platforms from providing juvenile “personalized channels”.
In the entire states, the company question dozens of regulations limiting social media – and in some cases they win.
“I think it shows that the courts are skeptical, that either there is no evidence for the purposes of legislators or that they are not precise enough,” Goldberg said. “So I’m skeptical. I don’t think this will help, because it will always be possible for children to have access to content on the Internet or on social media – it is almost impossible to enforce. “
