As statehouses ramp up for 2026, we’re seeing a familiar and concerning trend of lawmakers rushing to regulate the internet based on shockingly shaky science. From the California State Assembly to the Massachusetts and Minnesota legislatures, a wave of bills is crashing against the digital lives of young people, with proponents of these measures framing social media access as a “public health epidemic,” or a “mental health crisis,” even though we have yet to see any of the settled science that those labels usually invoke.
As a digital rights organization dedicated to the civil liberties of all users, EFF’s expertise lies in reminding lawmakers that young people enjoy largely the same free speech and privacy rights as adults. EFF is not a social science research shop, but we can read the emerging research. What that research shows is much more nuanced than what is claimed by those proposing to ban young people from social media, and it is clear that research and theories used to justify these sweeping bans is far from settled. The rush to ban access to digital platforms is being fueled by “pop psychology” narratives and a collection of statistically flawed studies that do not meet the rigorous standards required for such a massive infringement on youth autonomy and constitutional rights.
It’s bad for EVERYONE, no one in their right mind should use it, but it shouldn’t really be banned because the government doesn’t want to put limits on tech companies, that’s so fucking backwards. But then, what else is new.
/s ?
Not at all, we majorly dropped the ball by making zero legislation on social media companies, how they can use their algorithms, respecting people’s choices and privacy, and so on and quite frankly I think we have Trump to show for it. He’s the perfect candidate for abusing social media and it worked perfectly for him. He’s the social media candidate, this is what tech gave us.