Social Links: Milestones, Paywalls, and ‘Behavioral Cocaine’

Looks like WhatsApp just leveled up—whether it wanted to or not. Meta’s messaging giant has officially been crowned a Very Large Online Platform (VLOP) under the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA), which basically means, “Congrats, you’re now under extra scrutiny!” What does it take for an online platform or search engine to become a VLOP? Just a casual 45 million users—a threshold the European Commission says WhatsApp crossed last year. According to European Commissioner Thomas Regnier, WhatsApp Channels (its broadcasting feature) averaged about 46.8 million monthly active users over the last six months of 2024. That’s a lot of people forwarding memes. But under the DSA, great user numbers comes great regulatory responsibility. WhatsApp had to tweak its privacy policy on February 16 to reflect its newfound status under the DSA, which means it now has to offer ways for users to report illegal goods, shady services, and generally sketchy content—which, considering how much weird stuff circulates in group chats, might turn out to be a full-time job for some poor compliance team. The DSA is also implementing stricter controls on targeted ads, especially when it comes to children. Perhaps most importantly, European WhatsApp users now get more control over their data, including the right to opt out of recommendation systems and profiling. WhatsApp now joins its Meta siblings Facebook and Instagram in the VLOP club—a distinguished group of platforms now blessed by regulatory bodies with more regulations, more legal disclaimers, and more pop-ups about privacy rights.

CONNECTICUT WEIGHS SOCIAL MEDIA AGE RESTRICTIONS

Connecticut lawmakers heard testimony on a bill proposed by state Attorney General William Tong (HB 6857) that would restrict social media algorithms from targeting kids. The measure would limit the content anyone under age 18 would see by banning the use of personal data to drive recommendations, setting rules on when notifications can be sent, and restricting who can interact with their posts. At a press conference, Tong compared these algorithms to “behavioral cocaine,” claiming they fuel an online addiction by relentlessly doling out more and more extreme content. In a rare moment of bipartisan agreement (it happens), a handful of lawmakers jumped onboard, arguing that, with youth depression on the rise, it’s time someone reined in social media’s profound influence on children. Supporters say the bill empowers parents, sets reasonable limits, and holds companies accountable. Tech companies and their cheerleaders argue that algorithms can actually protect kids online, suggesting the focus should instead be on teaching children digital literacy. The bill is very similar to legislation proposed, or already in place, in multiple states—as your favorite blog recently covered.

PAYWALLS FOR REDDIT

Reddit, a platform widely celebrated for its open sharing of information, is now testing the waters with paywalls. In a recent video AMA (Redditspeak for “Ask Me Anything”), CEO Steve Huffman revealed that the company is officially flirting with selective paid access. Later this year, Reddit will roll out a paid subreddit feature, a move that Huffman described as still in its “early stages.” This isn’t the first time Reddit has hinted at premium content—last year, Huffman casually floated the idea of subreddits with private VIP areas, exclusive posts, and the kind of pay-to-play access that makes the internet feel less like a friend’s house party and more like a nightclub with a cover charge. This comes in the wake of Reddit’s quarterly earnings report, which has the company laser‑focused on increasing revenue. Since going public, Reddit has been determined to boost returns for shareholders—even if it means transforming the user experience. Many longtime users have grumbled about the number of ads, particularly on the platform’s mobile app, and the licensing of user-generated content to third parties. The fundamental question is this: Will users be willing to pay for a premium version of a forum that became successful largely because it was free?

SENATORS PUSH FOR SWEEPING CONTROLS ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Some lawmakers in Washington have decided that social media is officially too dangerous for kids. Enter the Kids Off Social Media Act (KOSMA), a bill that sounds like something designed by a suburban parent who just discovered TikTok. The legislation, which recently inched forward in the Senate Commerce Committee, would block anyone under 13 from creating social media accounts and limit recommendation algorithms for users under 17. The bill comes from the political odd couple of Brian Schatz (D-HI) and Ted Cruz (R-TX), two senators who are typically opposed on most policy issues. The senators argue that social media is fueling an “unprecedented mental health crisis” among young people and sweeping legislation is the only way to stop it. Enforcement would fall on the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general, so we’re probably looking at a chaotic, lawsuit-riddled rollout if the bill becomes law. KOSMA would determine a user’s age in a rather dubious fashion. Instead of standard ID checks or parental consent forms, social media companies will have to guess how old someone is by using data they already have. “The guessing is going to be, in some measure, inaccurate,” admitted Kate Ruane, director of the Free Expression Project at the Center for Democracy and Technology. That’s a nice way of saying millions of kids will either get locked out of their accounts or continue scrolling undetected because an algorithm thought they were a 32-year-old accountant from Nebraska. Meanwhile, Big Tech is already working to get ahead of the new wave of internet age-gating laws, as we’ve covered at length in recent weeks. Senator Schatz maintains that KOSMA is meant to work alongside existing federal efforts like the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) and the Children and Teens Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA 2.0), both of which passed last year. The bigger question is whether any of this will fix anything. Will banning 12-year-olds from Instagram prevent anxiety? Will neutering an algorithm make teenagers less obsessed with their phones? Or will all of this lead to a new underground economy of fake adult accounts and kids finding new, more creative ways to outsmart the very system designed to protect them?

TEXAS COURT BLOCKS SCOPE ENFORCEMENT

On February 7, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas hit the pause button on parts of the state’s Securing Children Online through Parental Empowerment Act—or, as it’s more commonly known, the SCOPE Act (every law needs a catchy acronym). Passed in 2023, the law was designed to place restrictions on digital service providers to protect minors online. But the SCOPE Act has been in legal limbo for a while. In Computer & Communications Industry Association v. Paxton, the court blocked some SCOPE provisions before they even had a chance to go into effect. The current case was brought by Students Engaged in Advancing Texas. They sued Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, arguing that the law tramples on free speech. The court agreed for the most part, ruling that the SCOPE Act regulates content and, therefore, must pass strict scrutiny—a very high bar to clear. Judge Robert Pitman found that certain parts of SCOPE, including rules on monitoring and filtering content, targeted ads, and age verification, did not pass strict scrutiny and cannot be enforced pending a final judgment in the case. Some provisions were also ruled too vague—because if a law leaves people scratching their heads, that’s generally a problem. For now, none of the combatants show signs of capitulation and the SCOPE saga appears to be far from over.