Social media bill drops parent lawsuits

A first-of-its-kind proposal in the California Legislature aimed at holding social media companies responsible for harming children who have become addicted to their products would no longer let parents sue popular platforms such as Instagram and TikTok.

The revised proposal would still make social media companies liable for damages of as much as $250,000 per violation for using features they know can cause children to become addicted. But it would only let prosecutors, not parents, file lawsuits against social media companies. The legislation was amended last month, CalMatters reported Thursday.

The bill’s author, Assemblymember Jordan Cunningham (R-Paso Robles), said he made the change to make sure the bill had enough votes to pass in the state Senate, where he said a number of lawmakers were “nervous about creating new types of lawsuits.”

“They get afraid it will open the floodgates to frivolous claims,” Cunningham said. “They seem to be more comfortable letting this be handled by the public prosecutors, who already end up taking the lead on this kind of consumer protection-type stuff.”

Although the revised bill might win more votes in the state Legislature, it hasn’t won over social media companies, many of which are based in California and remain opposed. TechNet, a group of technology chief executives and senior executives, says it is nearly impossible to separate social media content — words, photos and videos uploaded by people — from the features companies use to deliver that content, including push notifications, news feeds and the ability to scroll endlessly through posts.

“I think that violates our 1st Amendment rights and the editorial discretion that we have,” said Dylan Hoffman, TechNet’s executive director for California and the Southwest. “It doesn’t make sense to identify the feature when it’s the content underlying it that may cause the problem.”

Hoffman said social media companies have introduced lots of new features to address what he called “a really difficult and complex issue” of children’s use of social media.

The House Jan. 6 committee continues to reveal the lies and deceptions of former President Trump and his lackeys. We have an expression in Spanish — "¿Que más quieres?” — meaning, essentially, what more do you need to prove the point?

That expression stays with me as I watch the hearings and read the stories about the work of the committee. But the pity is, no matter how decisively the facts and testimony prove the lie of the “stolen election,” it won’t matter to a lot of people in this country.

Millions of die-hard, hard-headed Trump supporters won’t be budged by the truth. The work of the committee doesn’t matter. As an example, just watch the election in Wyoming, where Republican Rep. Liz Cheney, the committee vice chair, is being battled by Trump money and influence.

As a certain person is fond of saying, “Sad.”

Luis Torres

Pasadena

Former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone’s suggestion that former Vice President Mike Pence be awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom demonstrates two things.

First, it shows how intensely Trump applied pressure on Pence to commit a crime. And second, it shows Cipollone’s own dereliction of duty in not reporting to authorities the actions by Trump that he considered so egregious.

Cipollone and Pence have more evidence of Trump committing crimes, and neither is doing his duty to the American people and the justice system to provide all the evidence they have. Neither deserves anything but disdain for failing to perform their jobs as they swore to do.

Molly Martin

Santa Ana

If Trump isn’t indicted for seditious conspiracy and incitement to riot after the facts presented at the most recent Jan. 6 committee hearing, then indeed Justice (as in the Department of Justice) is blind.

Daniel Fink

Beverly Hills