House committee advances Kids Online Safety Act
The House Committee on Energy and Commerce has advanced two high-profile child safety bills that could remake large parts of the internet: the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) and the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA 2.0). The proposed laws passed on a voice vote despite discontent over last-minute changes to KOSA, in particular, that were aimed at quelling persistent criticism.
KOSA and COPPA 2.0 would give government agencies more regulatory power over tech companies with users under 18 years of age. The former imposes a “duty of care” on major social media companies, making them potentially liable for harm to underage users. The latter raises the age of enforcement for the 1998 COPPA law and adds new rules around topics like targeted advertising. Versions of both bills were passed by the Senate in July. Now that they’ve passed a House committee, they can proceed to a vote on the floor, after which they may need to be reconciled with their Senate counterparts before passing to President Joe Biden’s desk — where Biden has indicated he’ll sign them.
Earlier this year, it wasn’t clear KOSA would get a vote in the House. While it passed in the Senate by an overwhelming majority, a Punchbowl News report suggested House Republicans had concerns about the bill. The House’s version of KOSA diverges sharply from its Senate counterpart, however, and numerous lawmakers expressed a desire for changes before a full House vote. Both KOSA and COPPA 2.0 saw last-minute changes that were voted on in committee, leading some lawmakers to protest or withdraw support.
The House’s KOSA amendment modified a list of harms that large social media companies are supposed to prevent. It removed a duty of care for mitigating “anxiety, depression, eating disorders, substance use disorders, and suicidal behaviors” and added one for clamping down on the “promotion of inherently dangerous acts that are likely to cause serious bodily harm, serious emotional disturbance, or death.”
The change garnered significant criticism. Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), who said he would vote for the bill “reluctantly,” complained that the amendment could lead to regulatory agencies censoring potentially “disturbing” content. “Doesn’t all political speech induce some kind of emotional distress for those who disagree with it?” he contended. (Crenshaw supports a flat ban on social media access for younger teens.) Conversely, a number of lawmakers were concerned that removing conditions like depression would make the bill useless for addressing the alleged mental health harms of social media for kids.
KOSA cosponsor Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL), who backed the amendment, said it offered a “weakened” version of the bill with the aim of passing it to a full House vote. But neither version seems likely to satisfy critics who argue the bill could let regulators pressure companies into banning kids’ access to content a particular administration doesn’t like. The Electronic Frontier Foundation and others have raised concerns it could let a Republican president suppress abortion- and LGBTQ+-related content, while some Republican lawmakers are concerned a Democratic president could suppress anti-abortion messaging and other conservative speech.
The vote on COPPA 2.0 was less contentious. But Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) questioned a House provision that would let parents obtain information about their teen’s social media use from the site operators, even against the child’s wishes. Pallone warned the rule could let abusive parents monitor a child’s access to the internet. “In a bill purportedly providing more privacy protection for teens, Congress is creating, in my opinion, a backdoor by which their parents can snoop on their teens’ every click online,” he said. “Teens have a right to privacy as well.”
