Personal rights: liability: social media platforms.
The proposed legislation builds upon existing laws that already prohibit violence and intimidation based on protected characteristics. SB 771 specifically targets social media companies that generate substantial revenue, thereby focusing on large entities that ostensibly have the means to implement better content moderation policies. By doing so, the bill aims to effectively incorporate digital interactions within the existing framework of civil rights protections, demanding that social media platforms ensure their systems do not facilitate violations of these rights.
Senate Bill 771, introduced by Senator Stern, seeks to enhance the accountability of social media platforms in relation to civil rights laws. The bill aims to impose civil penalties on social media platforms that fail to comply with existing civil rights provisions, particularly when such platforms allow harmful content to disseminate through their algorithms. By establishing liability for social media companies that do not actively prevent violations of civil rights—such as acts of violence, intimidation, or coercion against marginalized communities—the bill represents a significant shift towards greater scrutiny of digital platforms.
The sentiment surrounding SB 771 appears supportive among legislators advocating for the protection of marginalized groups, particularly in light of rising hate crimes and discrimination values reported in California. Advocates suggest that this bill is necessary to address the growing need for accountability in social media practices. Conversely, there may be concerns among industry stakeholders about the implications of potential penalties on business operations, and whether the bill may inadvertently lead to increased censorship or stifle free expression online.
One notable point of contention could arise from the balance between enforcing civil rights and regulating online speech. Critics may argue that the bill does not adequately address concerns about freedom of speech and the potential overreach of content moderation efforts. Moreover, the bill's requirement for platforms to demonstrate proactive measures against violations could present challenges, particularly in defining what constitutes adequate diligence and knowledge regarding harmful content shared through their systems.