The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) easily passed the Senate today despite critics’ concerns that the bill may risk creating more harm than good for kids and perhaps censor speech for online users of all ages if it’s signed into law.

KOSA received broad bipartisan support in the Senate, passing with a 91–3 vote alongside the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Action (COPPA) 2.0. Both laws seek to control how much data can be collected from minors, as well as regulate the platform features that could harm children’s mental health.

However, while child safety advocates have heavily pressured lawmakers to pass KOSA, critics, including hundreds of kids, have continued to argue that it should be blocked.

Among them is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which argues that “the House of Representatives must vote no on this dangerous legislation.”

If not, potential risks to kids include threats to privacy (by restricting access to encryption, for example), reduced access to vital resources, and reduced access to speech that impacts everyone online, the ACLU has alleged.

The ACLU recently staged a protest of more than 300 students on Capitol Hill to oppose KOSA’s passage. Attending the protest was 17-year-old Anjali Verma, who criticized lawmakers for ignoring kids who are genuinely concerned that the law would greatly limit their access to resources online.

“We live on the Internet, and we are afraid that important information we’ve accessed all our lives will no longer be available,” Verma said. “We need lawmakers to listen to young people when making decisions that affect us.”

  • AmbiguousProps
    link
    fedilink
    English
    823 months ago

    Like all bills with “kids” or “children” in the name, it doesn’t have anything to do with kids and everything to do with violating our rights.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      63 months ago

      I believe the way it’s presented makes it difficult to vote against—you don’t want to be labeled as someone who is enabling the pedos.

      Seems like most legislation (in American in the past 40 or so years) is labeled to sound like a good thing, then you read it and it’s the exact opposite of what it pretends to be

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        73 months ago

        It’s named as attack ad bait. “So-and-so voted against the Kids Online Safety Act” sounds bad to the uninformed voter, and there are a lot of uninformed voters.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13 months ago

        That’s how these acts are labeled to trick voters like you and me, but thankfully in a representative democracy we have highly trained elected officials looking out for our values and reading the fine print so they don’t get caught by these silly simple title traps. Right?

  • Queue
    link
    fedilink
    English
    813 months ago

    On why KOSA is an outrageous censorship bill that puts the power to control what you see online in the hands of dangerous people: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/07/kosa-internet-censorship-bill-just-passed-senate-its-our-last-chance-stop-it

    On why KOSA is harmful to queer people, particularly trans youth: https://www.them.us/story/kids-online-safety-act-kosa-youth-lgbtq-content

    On Marsha Blackburn’s anti-trans intentions and what she feels KOSA should protect kids from: https://www.them.us/story/kosa-senator-blackburn-censor-trans-content (see also attached video clip)

    On why it’s not just queer people telling you KOSA is an absolute disaster: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-slams-senate-passage-of-kids-online-safety-act-urges-house-to-protect-free-speech

    Proof that the kids this bill purports to protect don’t want it to pass: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/03/thou

    And all but 3 members of the senate voted in approval: https://apnews.com/article/senate-child-online-safety-vote-f27c329679feb2d74787fc3887aa710f

    America only has bipartisan support for hurting minorities.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              23 months ago

              That’s strange wonder why? Sanders normally wouldn’t vote yes on something that would harm us.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                93 months ago

                Assuming good faith, perhaps he didn’t fully understand the implications of the bill. You know how old people are with technology. Even good people can pass bad laws if they don’t understand what they are legislating and the consequences of it.

      • Bakkoda
        link
        fedilink
        English
        33 months ago

        I mean if you could save face and vote no on a bill you know is gonna pass, wouldn’t you?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      43 months ago

      IMHO those pushing such things simply hate ND people. All the rest is side effects.

      And the reason they hate ND people is because they blame them for the 90s and early 00s where a lot of their shady behaviors were constantly exposed. Because in their opinion ND people are the reason humanity comes up with cures to that plague, of varying efficiency.

      As in - that measure of chaos which makes engineered social hierarchies fail. Destroying lives of ND people in their opinion means that there’ll be less chaos and their power will be more solid. It’s the same as why fascists hate LGBT - they want “normalcy”, predictable drones who don’t question orders.

      This, of course, strongly correlates with harm to most marginalized groups, because you are more likely to be part of one of them if ND.

      Particularly being autistic it’s easier to care about real good and real evil instead of your group being associated with good and some other group with evil.

      If this seems an unhinged rant, it is, but it’s also true.

  • NutWrench
    link
    fedilink
    English
    243 months ago

    Any time a lawmaker says they are doing something “for the children” you are being played. They are always up to something sh*tty.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      103 months ago

      It’s literally never about the children. When they say it’s for the children it’s because they’re looking to lock in some crazy unpopular authoritarian bullshit and prevent any argument because who’s going to argue against protecting children?

    • LustyArgonianMana
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Children are legally basically slaves in the US (of their parents, or if they get married, of their spouse). They are almost never granted more power for themselves or more freedoms. Most “for the children” rhetoric tends to advocate for removing even more of their freedoms and power. It’s really really sad.

      Giving kids the right to vote would be a start in the right direction. No taxation without representation, and we have child actors and performers paying millions in taxes. They deserve representation. Maybe they’d change the laws so their parents (owners) weren’t legally entitled to their money.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Giving kids the right to vote would be a start in the right direction.

        I worry about that. More “Liberal” parents might care what their child believes, but hierarchy obsessed conservatives will tell their children who to vote for as they’re “supposed” to always do what their parents say no matter what and without question.

        Also just noticed, and love your username lol

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    163 months ago

    Jesus fucking Christ we are still trying to roll this square up a fucking hill aren’t we?

    Bill doesn’t pass? Try it again in a few months or years.

    Rinse. Repeat.

    I’m so fucking tired of the stupid shit my tax money is wasted on.

  • peopleproblems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    103 months ago

    I think this vote proves that the easy flow of information is what those in power want to prevent. Can’t make money with people being too well informed.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    43 months ago

    lol and it uses the DSM, which is intended to be heavily moderated by an expert’s judgement every step of the way?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    33 months ago

    American “democracy” is a complete joke and the only reason it’s been allowed to continue like this is because people are apathetic cowards.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23 months ago

      Apathetic cowards are why it’s a joke. It’d work a lot better with more participation.

    • Todd Bonzalez
      link
      fedilink
      English
      43 months ago

      Do you know how the GDPR is a European thing, but since the Internet is global it affects everyone and we all get those little cookie consent boxes now no matter where on Earth you live?

      KOSA is the same, but way worse.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        You don’t get cookie check boxes because of GDPR. You’re getting them because companies want to track you, and need to ask if they do so.

        If they don’t want to steal your private info they don’t need cookie check boxes, even under GDPR.

        Additionally, those shitty checkboxes, that take 1000 clicks and 5 minutes if you don’t want to get tracked? Illegal under GDPR. Rejected getting tacked needs to be “as easy” as getting tracked by GDPR law.

        Companies hating their tracking data business going away like to shit on GDPR - and if it’s repeated frequently enough peopme believe it.

        (Btw Kosa sounds really dangerous in itself, I’m not advocating for that)

        • Todd Bonzalez
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          and need to ask if they do so.

          Because of the GDPR…

          I understand the point you’re trying to make, but it’s not actually an argument against what I said, you’re just throwing a tantrum because I made a good point that didn’t validate your narrative about laws that affect the Internet.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 months ago

            I’m not trying to argue against you, I’m just trying to rally people against crappy business tactics.

            Thanks for the personal attack, though.