In Part One of our series on age verification, we explore the fundamental tensions between safety, privacy, and speech.

View in browser ([link removed] )

July 9th, 2024 // Did someone forward you this newsletter? Sign up to receive your own copy here. ([link removed] )

Should we verify the ages of internet users?

Last month, the website WikiHow, which claims to be the most trusted how-to site on the internet, published the article, “How to Convince Your Parents to Get You a Cell Phone ([link removed] ) .”

For young people who desperately want a smartphone, it offers a step-by-step process to persuade their parents (one step teaches kids how to play on their parents' emotions).

According to a 2021 report by Common Sense Media ([link removed] ) , a Project Liberty Alliance member, 42% of kids in the US have a phone by age 10. By age 12, it’s 71%. By 14, it’s 91%.

Yet there is no clear answer for parents about when might be a good time to get your child a phone. Experts are quick to say it depends on multiple factors, including a child’s maturity and dynamics at home and at school. A parent’s decision to give their child a smartphone represents not just access to a device, but almost constant ([link removed] ) access to everything on the internet.

When kids should get their first phone is a hotly debated topic, as is a set of related questions that is playing out in public policy circles, media, and kitchen tables alike:

- In the name of safety, should we limit or ban the internet’s youngest users from accessing content online?
- How might age verification measures protect children from harmful content?
- How might those measures threaten privacy and free speech?
- Should children be treated differently than adults?

There issues are nuanced and complex, so we are dedicating the next two newsletters to this topic.

In Part one of this two-part series, we explore the tensions between the principles of safety, privacy, and speech, and how they manifest in age verification measures and policy efforts. Next week, we’ll explore the range of possible solutions to protecting kids, protecting privacy, and protecting speech.

//

The central trade-off between safety and privacy is that to protect kids online, you need to know who is a kid, and that requires getting data from them.

//

// The latest in age verification

Many states have taken initiative ([link removed] ) to pass new legislation to protect kids, leading to a fragmentation of online safety regulations ([link removed] ) . In 2023, more than 60 bills ([link removed] ) were introduced at the state and federal levels requiring greater parental consent, age restrictions, or other safety measures. By mid-2024, laws focused on online child safety have been passed in states including Florida, Louisiana, Texas, and California.

For example, Florida signed into law HB 3 ([link removed] ) in March. It requires:

- Social media platforms to prevent kids under 14 from creating accounts.
- Online platforms to verify their users’ ages.
- Consent from a parent or guardian for a 14- or 15-year-old to maintain social media accounts.

However well-intentioned, the effort to protect kids online has significant legal consequences, as some argue that it’s unconstitutional ([link removed] ) . Last week, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear ([link removed] ) an appeal from the adult entertainment industry seeking to overturn a Texas law that requires pornographic websites to verify the age of their users. Louisiana ([link removed] ) and Utah ([link removed] ) have faced similar lawsuits claiming that age restrictions threaten privacy and freedom of speech, but in both states, those appeals have been tossed. In Arkansas, an online child safety law was blocked ([link removed] ) by a federal judge.

// The vacuum at the federal level

The flurry of legislative activity at the state level is making up for a lack of progress at the federal level. The US is one of the few countries ([link removed] ) that has not passed comprehensive privacy legislation at the federal level. As recently as May, experts believed that could all change with the American Privacy Rights Act (APRA), a bill that seemed to have the bipartisan support needed to make its way through Congress. But now that bill appears doomed ([link removed] ) .

Another prominent bill, KOSA ([link removed] ) (Kids Online Safety Act), which also faces an uphill battle to becoming law, does not require age verification explicitly ([link removed] ) , but critics caution ([link removed] ) that it could lead to age verification measures in the future.

// Nuances & tradeoffs

What’s impeding legislative progress at both the federal and state levels is different beliefs about the trade-offs between safety, privacy, and speech.

// The push to make the web safer

The growing interest in age verification is a response to the growing concern about how the internet’s youngest and most vulnerable users face numerous risks: from cyberbullying to access to illicit drugs to harmful content like nude deepfakes.

- According to global research by Project Liberty ([link removed] ) , 65% of adults in seven countries were “very concerned” that kids might be subjected to cyberbullying or harassment.
- Researchers like Jonathan Haidt ([link removed] ) , a Project Liberty Fellow, believe the harms are serious enough that kids under 16 shouldn’t be on social media platforms at all. Age verification is one of four tenets in his book The Anxious Generation ([link removed] ) .
- The US Surgeon General issued an advisory ([link removed] ) in 2023 on social media usage and youth mental health and, more recently, has called for a warning label ([link removed] ) on social media platforms.

// The tradeoff between safety and privacy

The central trade-off between safety and privacy is that to protect kids online, you need to know who is a kid, and that requires getting data from them. At a time when our data is regularly bought, sold, and used to target ads, critics of age verification worry that it will infringe on individual privacy, placing more power in the hands of large tech companies.

- Privacy proponents like the Electronic Frontier Foundation ([link removed] ) believe that age verification and ensuing age restrictions will incentivize tech companies to collect even more data about users. EFF says that “age verification systems are surveillance systems ([link removed] ) .” They’re not alone, STOP ([link removed] ) , the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, is concerned that age verification will heighten online surveillance and harm the very communities officials seek to protect ([link removed] ) .
- Privacy proponents are not opposed to online safety ([link removed] ) , but they are opposed to age verification or age estimation tools (powered by AI) that threaten fundamental rights to privacy, anonymity, and control over data.

// The tradeoff between safety and speech

Free speech advocates in the US caution that limiting access to platforms limits freedom of speech. David French, a New York Times opinion columnist, wrote in March ([link removed] ) : “When you regulate access to social media, you’re regulating access to speech, and the First Amendment binds the government to protect the free-speech rights of children as well as adults.”

Not only would age verification measures prevent citizens from accessing information, but it could lead platforms to engage in overly cautious moderation practices to avoid legal liabilities ([link removed] ) . The result? De facto censorship of content considered harmful.

// The complexity of determining what's safe and what's not

While many are aligned about wanting kids to be safe, many disagree about what constitutes harm. As we’ve covered in previous newsletter editions ([link removed] ) , content moderation is frequently infused with cultural perspectives about what’s safe and what’s not. By preventing young people from accessing platforms that offer community and self-expression, there is a risk of isolating people who seek community and solidarity online ([link removed] ) . It’s possible that content that’s merely controversial is tossed out as harmful, and people are deprived of resources ([link removed] ) for issues like drug addiction, disordered eating, or mental health. Too often what is considered harmful is dictated by adults making decisions on behalf of young people.

// No easy answers

There are tradeoffs between protecting kids online, protecting data privacy, and protecting freedom of speech. Next week in part two we’ll dive into possible ways forward, but before we do, we’d love to hear from you. What’s your perspective on these tradeoffs? What nuances are missing?

Stay tuned for Part Two next week!

Other notable headlines

// 🏫 According to an article in Axios ([link removed] ) , cities, states, and school districts are passing sweeping bans on cellphones in schools. But do the policies work?

// 🤔 An article in The Economist ([link removed] ?) argued that AI technology has had almost no economic impact so far.

// 🗳 AI and politics can coexist, but an article in The Walrus ([link removed] ) suggested that new technology shouldn’t overshadow the terrain where elections are often still won—on the ground.

// 📝 An article in WIRED ([link removed] ) highlighted the words that give away generative AI text. From “delves” to “showcasing,” certain words boomed in usage after LLMs became mainstream.

// 🕵️‍♀️ In an era of online fakes, an article in The Wall Street Journal ([link removed] ) outlined steps to determine if someone is real.

// 🇰🇪 Protesters in Kenya have deployed creative uses of AI to take on the political establishment as part of nationwide anti-government demonstrations, according to an article in Semafor ([link removed] ) .

// 📱 An article in TechCrunch ([link removed] ) detailed how to set up parental controls on social media sites like Facebook, Snapchat, and TikTok.

Partner news & opportunities

// 5Rights launching youth-led podcast series

5Rights Foundation ([link removed] ) is launching a podcast entirely run by youth. The monthly podcast ([link removed] ) will be hosted by young people from around the world and will explore what a safer, rights-respecting digital world looks like. The podcast launches on July 25th.

// DWeb Camp 2024

August 7-11 | Camp Navarro, California

DWeb Camp ([link removed] ) returns in August. DWeb Camp is a space to make deep connections: to builders of decentralized technologies, to the pioneers of the World Wide Web, to global communities calling for better tools, and to policymakers building better ways to govern them. Bring your own tent or RV, or rent a private cabin or tent. Purchase tickets here ([link removed] ) .

// 13th Annual Symposium on Public Policy for Nonprofits 

September 20, 2024 | Virtual

Independent Sector ([link removed] ) is hosting their annual symposium on public policy for nonprofits. This year's theme, “Nonprofit Civic Infrastructure: A Recipe for a Thriving Nation ([link removed] ) ,” will focus on ideas around public policy and AI, youth perspectives, strategic volunteer engagement, shifting power to those with lived experience, unlocking and leveraging data, and more. Register here ([link removed] ) .

What did you think of today's newsletter?

We'd love to hear what you thought of today's newsletter. Reply to this email with:

- Feedback for how we can make this newsletter better
- Ideas for future editions
- A recommendation of someone we should interview

/ Project Liberty is leading a movement of people who want to take back control of their lives in the digital age by reclaiming a voice, choice, and stake in a better internet.

Thank you for reading.

Facebook ([link removed] )

LinkedIn ([link removed] )

Sin título-3_Mesa de trabajo 1 ([link removed] )

Instagram ([link removed] )

Project Liberty footer logo ([link removed] )

501 W 30th Street, Suite 40A,

New York, New York, 10001

Unsubscribe ([link removed] ) Manage Preferences ([link removed] )

© 2024 Project Liberty