Back in 2024, I published a reading of the Online Harms Act from my perspective as an admin of a Mastodon instance. The Online Harms Act was a proposed Canadian bill meant to regulate social media to prevent harmful content, particularly hate speech and child abuse materials. While the Online Harms Act ultimately did not come to pass (due the proroguing of Parliament later that year), the Carney Liberal government is bringing much of it back with a new Digital Safety Act. In this post, I am also giving the new Act a look from the perspective of a Mastodon admin.
Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024
The Online Safety Amendment Act 2024 is an Australian act of parliament that prohibits minors under the age of 16 from holding an account on certain social media platforms. It is an amendment to the Online Safety Act 2021 and was passed by the Parliament of Australia on 29 November 2024. It imposes monetary penalties on social media companies that fail to take reasonable steps to prevent minors under 16 that are located in Australia from having accounts on their services.
An Open Letter to the UK Government: Reconsider the Online Safety Act
To the Prime Minister, Members of Parliament, and the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology,
The Safe Social Media Act needs major fixes
Safety legislation is one step forward, two steps back
Online Safety Bills Are Fueling a New Wave of Internet Censorship
State and federal bills seek to limit minors’ access to social media, but civil liberties advocates warn that the resulting online censorship threatens constitutional rights without delivering real safety.
The Illusion of Protection: Why Canada’s Growing Push to Ban Social Media for Kids Won’t Work - Michael Geist
The momentum behind a social media ban for Canadian minors has been building for months. The federal Liberals voted at their April policy convention to back a minimum age of 16 for social media accounts and AI chatbots, the government’s expert panel on online safety is studying the issue, protesters have now rallied on Parliament Hill calling for it, and on Saturday night, Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew told a Winnipeg fundraiser that his government will be the first in Canada to ban social media and AI chatbots for kids. Kinew did not specify which kids, when it would happen, or how it would be enforced, none of which appeared to matter to the audience. The political appeal of a ban is obvious, since concerns about social media’s effects on young users are widely shared. Yet the policy itself is a terrible idea that will not work. This post examines at least six reasons why an outright age-based ban, particularly one that extends to AI chatbots, is the wrong response to a serious issue.
Everything You Wanted to Know About a Kids' Social Media Ban (But Were Rightly Afraid to Ask): A FAQ on Age Verification and Mandated ID for Everyone - Michael Geist
The government is expected to table the Digital Safety Act on Wednesday with reports that it will include a ban on social media for those under 16, framed as a “temporary” measure that platforms can exit once a new digital regulator certifies their safety standards. I have been writing about these issues, from the original Online Harms Act to mandated age verification and website blocking and now the kids’ ban, for several years. This FAQ gathers the analysis in one place, with links throughout to the longer pieces for anyone who wants to go deeper. The key takeaway is that a kids' social media ban is an ineffective and harmful policy that raises privacy concerns for tens of millions of Canadians through mandated age verification requirements. The policy fails to address the underlying concerns with social media and the prospect of a "temporary" ban makes little sense since the requirement might be reversible, but the data collection and regulatory infrastructure are permanent.
Kiss your online privacy goodbye with Bill C-22, Canada
Civil liberties groups, legal experts and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce have been sounding the alarm for months on the privacy and cybersecurity issues contained in the Carney government’s Lawful Access Act, or Bill C-22. In a not-so-surprising twist, American lawmakers have now also added their voice to those warning about the bill.
Bill C-22’s Groundhog Day: Why the Government’s Dismissal of Signal, Apple and the U.S. Congress Concerns Runs Back the Disastrous Online News Act Playbook - Michael Geist
Secure messaging service Signal yesterday became the latest company to warn that Bill C-22, the lawful access bill, could force it to leave the Canadian market rather than comply with provisions it says would compromise its end-to-end encryption and create new cybersecurity risks. Signal vice-president Udbhav Tiwari told the Globe and Mail that the company “would rather pull out of the country than be compelled to compromise on the privacy promises we have made to our users.” The comments are part of a steady stream of similar warnings from Apple, Meta, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, the Cybersecurity Advisors Network, and the chairs of the U.S. House Judiciary and Foreign Affairs Committees. Despite growing concern, the government’s response has been to launch a misleading social media campaign and repeatedly insist that the experts and companies are mistaken.
Digital Disability: A New Risk to Older People in Digital Societies
Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
Online harms research publications: December 2022
This is a selection of research reports to enhance the online harms evidence base. This research has helped improve understanding of harms experienced by adults and children, as well as how online harm can be measured.
‘Now we don’t have a safe place’: sex workers’ social media site Switter shuts down amid legal fears
Platform says government changes to online safety and defamation laws in Australia, UK and US made it ‘impossible’ to comply
U.S. Social Media Regulations for Minors
The digital lives of American children and teenagers have become a focal point of intense national debate and legislative action. ContentsThe Federal Foundation: The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)The State-Level Surge: A Patchwork of New RulesThe Next Generation of Federal Law: Congress Weighs InThe Constitutional Crossroads: Free Speech vs. State RegulationThe Great Debate: Voices […]
The Kids Online Safety Act Will Make the Internet Worse for Everyone
Lawmakers who support KOSA today are choosing to trust the current administration, and future administrations, to define what youth—and to some degree, all of us—should be allowed to read online.
Online abuse: banning anonymous social media accounts is not the answer
In the wake of the tragic death of Sir David Amess, some politicians are calling for a law banning anonymous social media profiles. But it’s not the right way to tackle online abuse.
14 Theses on Online Political Violence
The old world of content safety practices is dead, and the new one is struggling to be born.
Fighting Bad Internet Bills (US-centric for now)
News, analysis, discussion, and actions about KOSA, the KIDS Act, age verification bills, and other bills that would surveil and censor the internet.
Should Have Known Is the Wrong Standard for Kids’ Safety Laws
The SCREEN Act is a Christian Nationalist Nightmare
The Senate Should Reject KOSA's Privacy Risks
"The S is for surveillance": fighting KOSA and bad internet bills in the ATmosphere and the fediverses
Tips for contacting Congress about bad internet bills - Fighting Bad Internet Bills
.jpg)
Why Are Some Democrats Backing MAGA's Anti-LGBTQ+ Censorship?