Copyright Charleston Post and Courier
Forcing private companies to act as nannies is unnecessary and unconstitutional. Yet, that’s what’s being attempted in Colorado’s new law on healthy social media usage among youth. The last few years have seen numerous failed attempts to hold social media companies accountable for a range of issues, from the spread of misinformation to disciplinary problems within the classroom. Litigators have attempted to use product liability theories to sidestep the First Amendment and the Communications Decency Act, which protect speech and the companies that enable users to share their views with a broader audience. Since those attempts have failed, protectionist groups are making a pivot. Rather than framing content as the villain, they’re seeking to target usage by forcing companies to create inconvenient and incessant government-scripted pop-ups for users under 18. NetChoice, an organization that represents and supports online businesses, is suing Colorado for its attempt to violate First Amendment protections. The First Amendment is crucial for American freedom, not only because it protects the right to speak but also because it protects the right not to. Just as the government can’t condemn individuals and companies for sharing their views, they also can’t conscript anyone to become a mouthpiece for its views. But in the name of public safety, that is precisely what the Colorado government is attempting to do with the law. Passed in 2024 and set to take effect on Jan. 1, 2026, the law would force a vaguely defined group of “social media platforms” to post recurring messages to users under 18, warning them about the mental health hazards of extended online activity. The bill’s intentions are understandable. Extended social media use has been frequently associated with increased mental health challenges among young people. If the aim of this law were truly to help parents and young people make informed decisions, it would stop at the educational materials and curricula it requires the Department of Education to create and maintain, addressing mental health concerns in primary and secondary schools. However, it goes further, mandating that private companies make a pop-up every 30 minutes for users under 18 years old. Research indicates that pop-ups interrupt tasks, contribute to disorientation and evoke negative emotions in users. The aim of this law isn’t education; it’s interference. This kind of government overstep doesn’t deter “doom scrolling.” It’s interrupting a group of 16-year-old kids watching a 2.5-hour movie via YouTube on a Friday night. It’s impeding a high schooler trying to find advice on Reddit. It’s disrupting the creative process of a 17-year-old planning out her novel’s vision board on Pinterest. The reality is that parents and students have sufficient knowledge to make informed choices about technology. In addition to the educational content created by the Colorado law, many companies have provided resources to help parents monitor and restrict their children’s online activity. Most phones have the functionality to limit screen time and access to specific applications. There are tools designed specifically to help reduce social media usage. Even with all of these resources at their fingertips, parents and students might still make decisions the Colorado legislature deems harmful. It’s well within their right to do so. That doesn’t give the state an excuse to override the First Amendment rights of social media companies. State overreach is state overreach, even when it comes packaged as concern for child welfare, and this Colorado law is a significant violation of the compelled speech doctrine. Parents and students have more than enough tools to reduce their time on social media; the government can’t force social media companies to interrupt that time for them. LyLena D. Estabine is a technology writer for Listen Labs and a contributor for Young Voices. She wrote this for InsideSources.com.
