Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Закон про безпеку дітей в Інтернеті" in Ukrainian language version.
Sec 3.b.2: the covered platform or individuals on the platform from providing resources for the prevention or mitigation of suicidal behaviors, substance use, and other harms, including evidence-informed information and clinical resources.
It will be based on vague requirements that any Attorney General could, more or less, make up.
KOSA’s co-author, Sen. Blackburn of Tennessee, has referred to education about race discrimination as “dangerous for kids.” Many states have agreed and recently moved to limit public education about the history of race, gender, and sexuality discrimination.
The bill would enforce monitoring of anyone under the age of seventeen and give state attorneys general the power to censor content.
(In a block quote from Evan Greer) The phrase "consistent with evidence-informed medical information" does nothing to prevent that, because AGs can always find cherry-picked studies to support their wild claims. They're doing this right now. In his "emergency" order attempting to ban gender-affirming care, Missouri's attorney general cited a Swedish study that claims there is a lack of evidence to support the efficacy and safety of gender-affirming care. There is no legal definition of "evidence-based." Those are just words. This bill will absolutely allow AGs to go after platforms for recommending speech they don't like to younger users. Tying the duty of care to specific mental health outcomes is also problematic because it will lead to suppression of all discussion around those important but controversial topics.
While parents struggle to help their children manage the mental and emotional damage inflicted by this dangerous ideology, the left will continue to re-write our education system to fit their woke agenda—and they won’t stop until CRT is in every classroom in America. I will gladly stand with Tennessee parents to demand an end to this latest, unhinged attempt to brainwash our nation’s children.
Like SESTA/FOSTA, KOSA creates the aforementioned duty of care for social media companies, giving state attorneys general the power to sue sites like Instagram or Twitter if they put up content they deem “harmful” for kids and teens. With SESTA/FOSTA, we saw that tech companies preferred to shut down already-policed content about reproductive justice, LGBTQ+ identities, and sex education than risk a lawsuit.
KOSA’s supporters might want to ignore the fact that it’s a censorship bill in disguise, but the Heritage Foundation is saying the quiet part out loud. The hard-line conservative organization has openly said KOSA will help them censor the content conservatives don’t want young people to have access to.
