Ash Johnson

Following the Supreme Court’s decision today in the case of Moody v. NetChoice, ruling on Florida and Texas’ social media laws, ITIF issued the following statement from Senior Policy Manager Ash Johnson.

The evolution of children's media and advertising reflects societal shifts from nostalgic Saturday morning cartoons to today's digitally connected landscape. Debates over targeted advertising to children, echoing past concerns, highlight new challenges in privacy and consumer protection, shaping ongoing legislative discussions around online safety and economic feasibility.

Governor Kathy Hochul has announced a three-pronged proposal that, while well-intentioned, would take too much control away from parents and add to the state-by-state patchwork of legislation that complicates compliance and creates confusion for consumers.

America desperately needs a federal privacy law—but it needs the right federal privacy law. In its current state, APRA is not that law. But with a few important changes, it could be.

Protecting children from online harms requires a careful balance between ensuring safety and safeguarding free speech, user privacy, and parents’ rights. The most effective approach would split responsibility between the government, parents, and online services.

Age-appropriate design codes come from a noble place—the desire to protect children—but have serious flaws and threaten to do more harm than good. Instead of ID-based age verification, Congress should require device makers and platforms hosting age-restricted content to establish a “child flag” system—so everyone is assumed to be an adult unless they are marked as a child.

Repealing or sunsetting Section 230 will make the Internet a worse place, but there is much Congress can do to make the Internet better. Unfortunately, until policymakers understand the reality of Section 230 and how it protects not only large tech companies but any online services that hosts user-generated content, as well as users themselves, Congress will not make meaningful progress on content-related issues.

In its current form, Section 230 allows for a diverse Internet ecosystem, allowing online services to moderate content in a way that best suits their needs and the needs of their users. It is highly unlikely that, in 18 months, Congress will come up with a better solution.

In many regards, the proposed American Privacy Rights Act is a reasonable bipartisan compromise, though its draft language still has plenty of opportunities for fine-tuning and three provisions in particular that would have serious negative economic consequences if passed into law.

Recent history has demonstrated that any federal privacy bill faces an uphill battle toward becoming law. However, the vast similarities between the APRA and ADPPA are cause for cautious optimism.

In recent years, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has aggressively scrutinized the tech sector, going after virtual reality, artificial intelligence, online marketplaces, and Internet service providers. Now in its latest case against data brokers, the FTC and the courts could change the definition of privacy harms, unleashing a flood of litigation and potentially undermining the data economy.

Protecting children’s privacy online is an important goal, especially given the continued lack of comprehensive federal privacy regulation in the United States. With a few minor changes to proposed provisions, the FTC’s updates to the COPPA rule would improve protections for children while ensuring operators of online services do not face overly burdensome requirements.

Watch now for an expert panel discussion exploring the intersection between digital policy issues and the First Amendment, the free speech implications of proposals to address online problems, and how lawmakers could address these problems without infringing on users' or companies' speech rights.

Watch now for a panel discussion on the facts of the case, the claims against Meta, and how this lawsuit fits into the broader discussion over content moderation, privacy, children’s safety, and the responsibilities of social media platforms.

Watch now for the panel dsicussion focusing on age verification technology for social media, AI age estimation, and current capabilities and limitations that policymakers should consider when crafting legislation designed to protect children.

Gillian Diebold and Ashley Johnson moderate discussions about AI and education and children’s privacy concerns with emerging technology at the Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU) Annual Conference, hosted by BBB National Programs.

Ashley Johnson speaks at the Big Tech & Speech Summit, an exclusive forum addressing the red-hot controversies impacting Big Tech in Washington.

Ashley Johnson offers her perspective on the oral arguments in Gonzalez v. Google, the broader Section 230 reform debate, different legislative proposals for altering Section 230, and the implications of potential changes to Section 230.

Watch the discussion about the progress Congress has made in crafting bipartisan privacy legislation, the ADPPA’s current legislative status, and the remaining areas of debate regarding the legislation.

Join ITIF in-person for a discussion about what emerging technologies are on the horizon for law enforcement and how police departments can get the most out of these technologies while addressing some of the legitimate concerns.

View ITIF's panel discussion on whether and how the FTC or Congress should update COPPA to protect children’s privacy while increasing the quality and quantity of online services for children.

ITIF hosted a discussion on how Congress and social media platforms can balance free speech and harm reduction in the regulation and moderation of political speech online.

ITIF hosted an expert panel discussion on federal government web accessibility and policy proposals for agencies to improve their compliance.

ITIF hosted a discussion of these issues with leading experts on intermediary liability, free speech, and content moderation to discuss the current debate surrounding Section 230 and how the debate may unfold in the coming year.