Features that harm child users: civil penalty.
If enacted, SB 287 would impose significant responsibilities on social media companies, requiring them to conduct quarterly audits of their features and rectify any risk factors for violating these provisions. The consequences for non-compliance are severe, including a civil penalty of up to $250,000 per violation and associated litigation costs. This bill marks a notable shift in accountability for social media platforms regarding their impact on younger audiences, as it seeks to reduce the psychological and physical risks associated with their use.
Senate Bill 287, introduced by Senator Skinner, aims to regulate social media platforms by prohibiting designs, algorithms, or features that are harmful to child users. Specifically, the bill targets aspects that could lead to addiction, self-harm, eating disorders, or exposure to harmful content such as the promotion of controlled substances or firearms. This legislative effort is built upon existing regulations under the California Consumer Privacy Act and the upcoming California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, which collectively seek to enhance the safety of children online.
The bill has generated diverse reactions among lawmakers and stakeholders. Proponents argue it is a necessary step to protect vulnerable children from predatory practices and harmful content that can lead to severe consequences for their mental health. They emphasize the importance of holding companies accountable for the experiences of child users. Conversely, critics express concerns regarding the potential overreach of the state into digital space, fearing that such regulations could hinder free speech and innovation in the tech industry.
A key point of contention revolves around the responsibility of social media platforms versus user-generated content. While the bill lays out clear penalties for platforms, it also includes stipulations that protect them from liability under certain circumstances, such as when content is posted by users themselves. This dual approach raises questions about how the line is drawn regarding platform accountability versus user freedom, igniting ongoing debates about child protection, corporate responsibility, and the complexities of digital governance.