Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You may recall, Oh, I forget when a week a
week and a half ago something like that on the show.
I had a guest on the show talking about a
law that was passed in Colorado and the law is
entitled Healthier Social Media Use by Youth and his house
(00:20):
built twenty four DASH eleven thirty six. And I will
note again as I did then, that this is a
bill that.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
Passed with bipartisan support.
Speaker 1 (00:31):
Rose Poglici, who has since resigned from the state House
but was the leader of Republicans in the state House,
was a sponsor of this bill. And then there's other
Republicans and Democrats on it. And my guest opposed the bill.
And I got an email from some folks at Common
Sense Media saying, well, we support this bill and we'd
(00:53):
love to be on the show to explain.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Our position on it. And I said, sure, that.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Sounds like fun, and I was like having both sides
on stuff. So joining us talk about it is Holly
Gross Huns, who is Senior counsel for Tech policy at
Common Sense Media. Their website, by the way, CommonSenseMedia dot org.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
Hi Holly, thanks for being here.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
Hi Ross, thanks so much for having me on.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
So I'm I'm going to do this again, just because
I don't.
Speaker 1 (01:21):
Assume that everybody hearing us now heard that previous conversation.
Can you please tell us the main things that this
bill does that are the objects of some controversy.
Speaker 3 (01:34):
Sure, definitely.
Speaker 4 (01:35):
So the bill does two things, and actually we believe
the law is much more nuanced than that choice will
lead you to believe when they said that the law
does the first thing and it makes it requires.
Speaker 3 (01:46):
The state's career resource thing.
Speaker 4 (01:48):
While that's actually true, the law actually requires the.
Speaker 3 (01:51):
Colorado Department of Education.
Speaker 4 (01:52):
So you can be in a stakeholder group, and the
law is very prescriptive as.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
To who should be in that group.
Speaker 4 (01:59):
It's educators, a montal health professionals, parents, youth technology experts,
and a representative from Technology Industry Association or technology engineer.
And the stakeholder group was has to be building a
resource bank consisting of evidence based, research based, scholarly articles,
and promising program materials and curricula. This stakeholder group actually
(02:19):
did what they're supposed to do. They could, they convened,
they made this resource bank. The resource bank went live
on the calendrat A Department of Education's website. In July
of this year, and that resource bank currently has over
forty resources related to social media, and it's a really
diverse resource bank.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
So it's not just a resource banks net.
Speaker 4 (02:38):
Choice, but we should believe that's saying that social media
is bad. In fact, there is an article and they
are from Hope Lab that is called Without it, I
wouldn't be here today. LGBTQ plus young people's experiences in
online spaces.
Speaker 3 (02:51):
So it is a very diverse resource bank.
Speaker 4 (02:53):
And the second thing that the law is doing is
that it acquire social media platforms to establish a function
that provides underage users with certain information. And it's very
very flexible for those companies as to.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
What that function is. So it's not.
Speaker 4 (03:10):
That the state is telling social media companies, this is
the information you have to put on your product, and
you have to slap this label on there. In fact,
the companies really have the flexibility in the language.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
Of that label.
Speaker 4 (03:22):
The only requirement is that the label must be supported
by either data from peer reviewed scholarly articles or be
drawn from the sources included in the resource bank. So
this function that is required, you know, does need to
be provided to users under the age of eighteen.
Speaker 3 (03:40):
If they declare themselves.
Speaker 4 (03:41):
To be under the age of eighteen, and it does
in fact need to provide information, but there's a lot
of flexibility in what that information is.
Speaker 3 (03:48):
It's not just the state saying social media is bad.
Speaker 2 (03:51):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
So I will just say, in the conversation I had
with the Net Choice guy, the first thing you talk
about with the Resource Bank never came up. I never
came up at all, And at least in the interview
with me, he didn't object to it, and all the
conversation was about the other thing. And what the law
calls a function, and you're calling a function, But just
(04:14):
to make it clearer, I will call it a message.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
And I will just quote so there's no spin. I'm
just going to quote from the summary on the state
legislative web page. Right. So it's not Net Choice, not me,
it's just through the legislature.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
And again I remind listeners, this is a bipartisan bill.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
Okay, it's not all Dems, it's not all Republicans.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
As a bipartisan bill on or after January first, twenty
twenty six, the Act requires a social media platform as
defined by the Act, to establish a function that provides
a user who is under the age of eighteen with
information about social media that helps the user understand the
impacts of social media use on the developing brain and
the mental and physical health of youth. Or displays a
(04:57):
notification every thirty minutes when the user has spent one
hour on social media platforms in a twenty four hour period,
or is on a social media platform between the hours
of ten pm and six am. Okay, so I'm going
to just get a little technical here. The part after
the ore is pretty straightforward. Displays a notification every thirty
(05:17):
minutes when the user does when the user you know
all that.
Speaker 2 (05:22):
What do you think the part before the ore means.
Speaker 1 (05:25):
I mean, if it's not displaying a notification, then what
is a function that provides a user with information? What
is that if it's not a notification or a message.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
Well, the other part of.
Speaker 4 (05:40):
That law is that the Office of Technology is going
to bring out standards that the companies need to use.
Speaker 3 (05:47):
In creating this function. But really what that function.
Speaker 4 (05:50):
Is going to be is really just going to be
based on those standards, which have not yet to my knowledge,
been published. But those standards will create kind of the
guidelines that the companies need to use. But really there
might be many companies that comply in many different ways
with this law. And that's kind of the flexibility that
was given to the companies in the drafting of this law,
and it was really I think there is floor argument
(06:13):
regarding that flexibility in the legislature before passing the law.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
Okay, so it sounds like what you're saying is under
the law, social media users under the age of eighteen
will have to be informed somehow with some message that
complies with these very specific things. Has spent an hour
on social media in a twenty four hour period, or
is on a social media platform between ten pm and
(06:37):
six am. Those two things are very specific. But separate
from that, you're arguing that there's a fair bit of
flexibility in how that message gets delivered to the user, right,
in how that message.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
Gets delivered to the user, and also what that message is.
Speaker 4 (06:54):
So that message could be as long as it's based
on scholarly articles that social media use or use has
its benefits and its risks. I mean, it could be
that message, Okay, it just needs to be based on
these scholarly articles or the resource thing.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Okay, So I think now I'm just gonna pretend to
be like net Choice's attorney here for a minute, because
so what I'll say, And by the way, for folks
just joining, we're tallant talking with Holly Grosson's from common
Sense Media, Senior Tech Council for Common Sense Media. CommonSenseMedia
dot org is their website. All right, I'm gonna play
(07:30):
their attorney.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
Holly.
Speaker 1 (07:33):
You're missing my point, which is a much higher level
point than this. I don't care about exactly what's in
the message. I don't care how scholarly the message is.
I will stipulate that the message will contain some kind
of accurate information. My problem is that it is unconstitutional
(07:54):
for the government to force a private company to say
anything and that and so you're making good points about
why maybe we shouldn't be so skeptical about what the
message would be, but that's not really my issue. My
issue is the government forcing a private company to post
(08:15):
a message.
Speaker 4 (08:18):
And my response to that would be that this is
actually commercial speech that we're talking about. So this function
is commercial because it's a relationship between the platforms and
their user, and that relationship is truly commercial. The company
provides a service to the user in exchange for the
user's attention and.
Speaker 3 (08:34):
Their data, which then is monetized by the company.
Speaker 4 (08:37):
So as commercial speech, the speech is scrutinized is by the.
Speaker 3 (08:43):
Court at a different level than the.
Speaker 4 (08:45):
Strict scrutiny that net Choice is asking for or intermediate scrutiny,
which is in the lower level of scrutiny.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
It's actually.
Speaker 4 (08:52):
Reviewed under this commercial speech standard, which is separate. It's different,
and under that standard under according to Supreme Court President,
and this is from nineteen eighty five, as long as
the commercial speech is a disclosure about a compelling government interest,
which obviously the mental health of a youth of Colorado.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
Is a compelling government interest, and I don't think that
Choice is disputing that piece.
Speaker 4 (09:16):
As long as that it's compelling government interests, the disclosure
is purely factual and uncontroversial. Again, the only requirement is.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
That the information is based on facts. Here and as.
Speaker 4 (09:26):
Long as the disclosure is not unduly burdens in to
the companies. And again in this law, the companies have
a lot of flexibility and what that label is going
to look like.
Speaker 3 (09:35):
So according to that standard, I think that this law.
Speaker 4 (09:38):
Would definitely pass constitutional scrutiny by the courts even if
the courts were to determine that this isn't commercial speech,
that Colorado still has a compelling interest in protecting the
health and well being of its children, and so that
would really satisfy any level of scrutiny.
Speaker 1 (09:55):
Well, so I'll take your word for it on the
commercial scrutiny thing, and we'll see how that plays out.
I don't think I take your word for it that
the Supreme Court of the United States would say that
a claimed or even let's say you believe it legitimate
government interest overwhelms the First Amendment.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
I don't think that's as obvious as you made it sound.
Speaker 1 (10:20):
But that's what judges are for, that's what trials are for.
Are you guys involved in this case in a direct
participant way or is it more like an amicust brief
kind of way, or what's your role?
Speaker 4 (10:35):
We supported the law Healthier Colorado actually was I think
the man supporter of the law.
Speaker 3 (10:42):
We came in and supported the law.
Speaker 4 (10:44):
We supported the law with some testimony on My colleagues
from Colorado came and testified in oral testimony.
Speaker 3 (10:51):
I believe that was actually live before the legislature.
Speaker 4 (10:55):
At this point, we have not participated or joined an
amachist grief.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
All right, very interesting conversation, and we'll see. We'll see
how it plays out. And I'm sort of torn on
it because I think I think that, especially for children,
I think social media is poison and highly addictive and terrible.
I'm not saying there's no upside to it, but there's
lots and lots of downside. And I fully understand the
(11:23):
desire of politicians and parents and other folks like you
and maybe like me, to want to educate children about
that kind of risk. And I also understand the net
choice argument about government compulsion against a private enterprise. It'll
be very very interesting to see as a constitutional matter
(11:44):
how it plays out in court. Holly Grosshuns is senior
counsel for tech policy at Common Sense Media. CommonSenseMedia dot
org is the website. Thanks for your time, Thanks for
the great conversation.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
All right, Thank you so much, Ross, nice to talk
to you you too.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
We'll be right back on ka
You may recall, Oh, I forget when a week a
week and a half ago something like that on the show.
I had a guest on the show talking about a
law that was passed in Colorado and the law is
entitled Healthier Social Media Use by Youth and his house
(00:20):
built twenty four DASH eleven thirty six. And I will
note again as I did then, that this is a
bill that.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
Passed with bipartisan support.
Speaker 1 (00:31):
Rose Poglici, who has since resigned from the state House
but was the leader of Republicans in the state House,
was a sponsor of this bill. And then there's other
Republicans and Democrats on it. And my guest opposed the bill.
And I got an email from some folks at Common
Sense Media saying, well, we support this bill and we'd
(00:53):
love to be on the show to explain.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Our position on it. And I said, sure, that.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
Sounds like fun, and I was like having both sides
on stuff. So joining us talk about it is Holly
Gross Huns, who is Senior counsel for Tech policy at
Common Sense Media. Their website, by the way, CommonSenseMedia dot org.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
Hi Holly, thanks for being here.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
Hi Ross, thanks so much for having me on.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
So I'm I'm going to do this again, just because
I don't.
Speaker 1 (01:21):
Assume that everybody hearing us now heard that previous conversation.
Can you please tell us the main things that this
bill does that are the objects of some controversy.
Speaker 3 (01:34):
Sure, definitely.
Speaker 4 (01:35):
So the bill does two things, and actually we believe
the law is much more nuanced than that choice will
lead you to believe when they said that the law
does the first thing and it makes it requires.
Speaker 3 (01:46):
The state's career resource thing.
Speaker 4 (01:48):
While that's actually true, the law actually requires the.
Speaker 3 (01:51):
Colorado Department of Education.
Speaker 4 (01:52):
So you can be in a stakeholder group, and the
law is very prescriptive as.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
To who should be in that group.
Speaker 4 (01:59):
It's educators, a montal health professionals, parents, youth technology experts,
and a representative from Technology Industry Association or technology engineer.
And the stakeholder group was has to be building a
resource bank consisting of evidence based, research based, scholarly articles,
and promising program materials and curricula. This stakeholder group actually
(02:19):
did what they're supposed to do. They could, they convened,
they made this resource bank. The resource bank went live
on the calendrat A Department of Education's website. In July
of this year, and that resource bank currently has over
forty resources related to social media, and it's a really
diverse resource bank.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
So it's not just a resource banks net.
Speaker 4 (02:38):
Choice, but we should believe that's saying that social media
is bad. In fact, there is an article and they
are from Hope Lab that is called Without it, I
wouldn't be here today. LGBTQ plus young people's experiences in
online spaces.
Speaker 3 (02:51):
So it is a very diverse resource bank.
Speaker 4 (02:53):
And the second thing that the law is doing is
that it acquire social media platforms to establish a function
that provides underage users with certain information. And it's very
very flexible for those companies as to.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
What that function is. So it's not.
Speaker 4 (03:10):
That the state is telling social media companies, this is
the information you have to put on your product, and
you have to slap this label on there. In fact,
the companies really have the flexibility in the language.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
Of that label.
Speaker 4 (03:22):
The only requirement is that the label must be supported
by either data from peer reviewed scholarly articles or be
drawn from the sources included in the resource bank. So
this function that is required, you know, does need to
be provided to users under the age of eighteen.
Speaker 3 (03:40):
If they declare themselves.
Speaker 4 (03:41):
To be under the age of eighteen, and it does
in fact need to provide information, but there's a lot
of flexibility in what that information is.
Speaker 3 (03:48):
It's not just the state saying social media is bad.
Speaker 2 (03:51):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
So I will just say, in the conversation I had
with the Net Choice guy, the first thing you talk
about with the Resource Bank never came up. I never
came up at all, And at least in the interview
with me, he didn't object to it, and all the
conversation was about the other thing. And what the law
calls a function, and you're calling a function, But just
(04:14):
to make it clearer, I will call it a message.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
And I will just quote so there's no spin. I'm
just going to quote from the summary on the state
legislative web page. Right. So it's not Net Choice, not me,
it's just through the legislature.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
And again I remind listeners, this is a bipartisan bill.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
Okay, it's not all Dems, it's not all Republicans.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
As a bipartisan bill on or after January first, twenty
twenty six, the Act requires a social media platform as
defined by the Act, to establish a function that provides
a user who is under the age of eighteen with
information about social media that helps the user understand the
impacts of social media use on the developing brain and
the mental and physical health of youth. Or displays a
(04:57):
notification every thirty minutes when the user has spent one
hour on social media platforms in a twenty four hour period,
or is on a social media platform between the hours
of ten pm and six am. Okay, so I'm going
to just get a little technical here. The part after
the ore is pretty straightforward. Displays a notification every thirty
(05:17):
minutes when the user does when the user you know
all that.
Speaker 2 (05:22):
What do you think the part before the ore means.
Speaker 1 (05:25):
I mean, if it's not displaying a notification, then what
is a function that provides a user with information? What
is that if it's not a notification or a message.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
Well, the other part of.
Speaker 4 (05:40):
That law is that the Office of Technology is going
to bring out standards that the companies need to use.
Speaker 3 (05:47):
In creating this function. But really what that function.
Speaker 4 (05:50):
Is going to be is really just going to be
based on those standards, which have not yet to my knowledge,
been published. But those standards will create kind of the
guidelines that the companies need to use. But really there
might be many companies that comply in many different ways
with this law. And that's kind of the flexibility that
was given to the companies in the drafting of this law,
and it was really I think there is floor argument
(06:13):
regarding that flexibility in the legislature before passing the law.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
Okay, so it sounds like what you're saying is under
the law, social media users under the age of eighteen
will have to be informed somehow with some message that
complies with these very specific things. Has spent an hour
on social media in a twenty four hour period, or
is on a social media platform between ten pm and
(06:37):
six am. Those two things are very specific. But separate
from that, you're arguing that there's a fair bit of
flexibility in how that message gets delivered to the user, right,
in how that message.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
Gets delivered to the user, and also what that message is.
Speaker 4 (06:54):
So that message could be as long as it's based
on scholarly articles that social media use or use has
its benefits and its risks. I mean, it could be
that message, Okay, it just needs to be based on
these scholarly articles or the resource thing.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Okay, So I think now I'm just gonna pretend to
be like net Choice's attorney here for a minute, because
so what I'll say, And by the way, for folks
just joining, we're tallant talking with Holly Grosson's from common
Sense Media, Senior Tech Council for Common Sense Media. CommonSenseMedia
dot org is their website. All right, I'm gonna play
(07:30):
their attorney.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
Holly.
Speaker 1 (07:33):
You're missing my point, which is a much higher level
point than this. I don't care about exactly what's in
the message. I don't care how scholarly the message is.
I will stipulate that the message will contain some kind
of accurate information. My problem is that it is unconstitutional
(07:54):
for the government to force a private company to say
anything and that and so you're making good points about
why maybe we shouldn't be so skeptical about what the
message would be, but that's not really my issue. My
issue is the government forcing a private company to post
(08:15):
a message.
Speaker 4 (08:18):
And my response to that would be that this is
actually commercial speech that we're talking about. So this function
is commercial because it's a relationship between the platforms and
their user, and that relationship is truly commercial. The company
provides a service to the user in exchange for the
user's attention and.
Speaker 3 (08:34):
Their data, which then is monetized by the company.
Speaker 4 (08:37):
So as commercial speech, the speech is scrutinized is by the.
Speaker 3 (08:43):
Court at a different level than the.
Speaker 4 (08:45):
Strict scrutiny that net Choice is asking for or intermediate scrutiny,
which is in the lower level of scrutiny.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
It's actually.
Speaker 4 (08:52):
Reviewed under this commercial speech standard, which is separate. It's different,
and under that standard under according to Supreme Court President,
and this is from nineteen eighty five, as long as
the commercial speech is a disclosure about a compelling government interest,
which obviously the mental health of a youth of Colorado.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
Is a compelling government interest, and I don't think that
Choice is disputing that piece.
Speaker 4 (09:16):
As long as that it's compelling government interests, the disclosure
is purely factual and uncontroversial. Again, the only requirement is.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
That the information is based on facts. Here and as.
Speaker 4 (09:26):
Long as the disclosure is not unduly burdens in to
the companies. And again in this law, the companies have
a lot of flexibility and what that label is going
to look like.
Speaker 3 (09:35):
So according to that standard, I think that this law.
Speaker 4 (09:38):
Would definitely pass constitutional scrutiny by the courts even if
the courts were to determine that this isn't commercial speech,
that Colorado still has a compelling interest in protecting the
health and well being of its children, and so that
would really satisfy any level of scrutiny.
Speaker 1 (09:55):
Well, so I'll take your word for it on the
commercial scrutiny thing, and we'll see how that plays out.
I don't think I take your word for it that
the Supreme Court of the United States would say that
a claimed or even let's say you believe it legitimate
government interest overwhelms the First Amendment.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
I don't think that's as obvious as you made it sound.
Speaker 1 (10:20):
But that's what judges are for, that's what trials are for.
Are you guys involved in this case in a direct
participant way or is it more like an amicust brief
kind of way, or what's your role?
Speaker 4 (10:35):
We supported the law Healthier Colorado actually was I think
the man supporter of the law.
Speaker 3 (10:42):
We came in and supported the law.
Speaker 4 (10:44):
We supported the law with some testimony on My colleagues
from Colorado came and testified in oral testimony.
Speaker 3 (10:51):
I believe that was actually live before the legislature.
Speaker 4 (10:55):
At this point, we have not participated or joined an
amachist grief.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
All right, very interesting conversation, and we'll see. We'll see
how it plays out. And I'm sort of torn on
it because I think I think that, especially for children,
I think social media is poison and highly addictive and terrible.
I'm not saying there's no upside to it, but there's
lots and lots of downside. And I fully understand the
(11:23):
desire of politicians and parents and other folks like you
and maybe like me, to want to educate children about
that kind of risk. And I also understand the net
choice argument about government compulsion against a private enterprise. It'll
be very very interesting to see as a constitutional matter
(11:44):
how it plays out in court. Holly Grosshuns is senior
counsel for tech policy at Common Sense Media. CommonSenseMedia dot
org is the website. Thanks for your time, Thanks for
the great conversation.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
All right, Thank you so much, Ross, nice to talk
to you you too.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
We'll be right back on ka
The Ross Kaminsky Show News
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com