For years, America treated the internet like a free speech “Wild West,” assuming the online world should operate with almost no guardrails. Because of this, our nation has operated under two dangerous assumptions about Big Tech: that platforms should be free to publish virtually anything without accountability, and that tech companies should be allowed to design their platforms however they want because “users can always leave.”
Courts, and state legislatures are now rejecting both ideas in real time.Â
We are facing the consequences of applying a totally hands-off philosophy to the digital world. As Jonathan Haidt documents in his book, “The Anxious Generation,” rates of anxiety, depression, self-harm, loneliness and suicide among teens, especially girls, skyrocketed after smartphones and social media became dominant around 2012.
Teen girls rates of major depressive episodes nearly doubled in the following decade, while emergency room visits for self-harm surged. Parents have been carefully monitoring their childrens physical world, but not their digital activity.
The result is what Haidt describes as children becoming “overprotected in the real world and underprotected online,” with less independence offline but unlimited exposure to things like pornography, sexual predators, comparison and the like.Â
But Americas hands-off approach toward Big Tech did not stop with online content. We also embraced the idea that if consumers dislike how a product functions, they should simply find another one. Dont like how a platform operates? Leave. Dont like shadow-banning or manipulative algorithms? Use a different app. But courts and juries across the country are increasingly showing those assumptions are not absolute.Â
Earlier this year, a jury ordered Meta and YouTube to pay $3 million to a family over the harm caused by their addictive platforms. A jury in New Mexico also ordered Meta to pay $375 million in civil penalties for misleading and endangering young users. Just days ago, Meta settled a major lawsuit with a Kentucky school district over addiction and mental health concerns. In my home state, Attorney General Marty Jackley has joined the fight against Big Tech, arguing Meta “needs to be held accountable for its actions.”
Â
These legal fights are showing a clear result: a free-market excuse to build and sell whatever they want. The internet is not a free-for-all where free speech is the only value and consent is the only requirement.
So, what can we actually do to rein in Big Tech and protect the next generation?
We as hard look at what we are giving our children access to. In “The Tech Exit,” author Clare Morrell gives examples of the detrimental effects of screen time, and gives practical advice for how families can try a 30-day digital “fast.”
Her advice comes as a helpful guide for parents who have read “The Anxious Generation,” and are wanting to build a better childhood for their kids. Things like delaying smartphones until children are older, putting stronger safeguards in place and creating healthier boundaries around technology use can go a long way.Â
While the primary responsibility for stewarding childhood falls on families, state and federal governments also have a role to play. Its not the responsibility of individual families to make sure that billion-dollar tech companies are following the law, thats where the government steps in.
Lawmakers should advance protections like the App Store Accountability Act (ASAA). The idea is simple: tech companies should not be entering into legal agreements directly with children.
The legislation would require to verify age, ensure companies contract with parents instead of minors, and require honest age ratings so families actually know what kids are downloading. It would also strengthen enforcement of COPPA, the federal law that prohibits companies from collecting personal data from children
