Internet

The Australian government announced on November 8, 2024, its intention to introduce legislation this year banning users under 16 from social media platforms. As is the case with similar legislation at the state level in the United States, blocking an entire age group from social media is the equivalent of using a regulatory sledgehammer instead of a scalpel to address complex and evolving online safety issues.

If one is inclined to be critical, or even simply skeptical of digital technology and the companies that bring it to us, this is the book for you. This is not a balanced and academic book, but it does provide a vibrant narrative for those predisposed to believe it.

Watch now for a panel discussion exploring how anti-tech conservatives would weaponize the government against technology, the legitimacy of conservatives’ anti-tech arguments, and the implications of their proposals for society.

The conservative "techlash" targets Big Tech for suppressing conservative values. Some now support government intervention, which contradicts traditional conservative principles of limited government. A better approach would be light-touch regulation, focusing on transparency and parental control, while preserving innovation and free markets.

Project LEIA is an excellent opportunity to move in the right direction, and we commend NTIA for this bold approach.

Europe needs to pump the brakes on new regulations before it can properly assess the long-term effects of the GDPR, DSA, DMA, and AI Act.

Some conservatives have grievances with “Big Tech” companies and would marshal the power of government to punish them. But the policy proposals stemming from this conservative “techlash” would have significant costs for consumers, businesses, and the economy.

Senators Katie Britt (R-AL) and John Fetterman (D-PA) introduced the Stop the Scroll Act, which would require warning labels on social media platforms about potential mental health risks. However, the proposal is flawed due to the lack of scientific consensus linking social media to mental health harms and the ineffectiveness of pop-up warnings, which are often ignored by users, especially children.

While increasing children’s online safety and privacy are important goals, it is important not to infringe on others’ rights, or children’s own rights, in the process.

Age assurances are not the only available option to protect children online. But if policymakers are set on mandating age assurance systems, regulation should be limited to high-risk circumstances, avoid inflexible requirements, and be designed to be technologically and commercially agnostic.