NationStates

Recently, Utah has become one of the first states to enact laws limiting how children can use social media. Republican Gov. Spencer Cox signed two laws that will go into effect March 1, 2024.

According to Vox, the first law, “SB 152”, requires social media companies to verify if the user is under or over 18 years old. If they are under 18, they have to get there parent/guardian’s permission before accessing the app. It will also enact that a digital curfew period is enforced, making sure no one can access the site from 10:30PM to 6:30AM.

The second law, “HB 311”, requires social media companies to ensure that they are not designed to cause minors to become addicted to them, and gives Utah’s minors the right to sue social media companies if they believe they’ve become addicted to or otherwise somehow harmed by a social media platform they have an account on.

Likewise, other states are considering the possibility of enforcing new laws, similar to the ones Utah.

Now, the real question is, what does the Nationstate’s community think of this?

W Utah

Literally the People’s Republic of China

Utah also voted to make a new flag. Why aren't we talking about that?

Improper Classifications wrote:Utah also voted to make a new flag. Why aren't we talking about that?

That's the real crime. First Mississippi, now Utah? Leave the flags alone!

Improper Classifications wrote:Utah also voted to make a new flag. Why aren't we talking about that?

Looks hideous, and the beehive gives off LDS vibes

The flag is something we can discuss later (tho it’s awful tbh), right now, we are focusing on the fact that Utah plans to limit social media. Including enforcing a digital curfew period, which I feel like we really should be talking about the digital curfew period.

How is Utah defining social media? Are smaller website included? What will they do about websites hosted outside of Utah/the US? How exactly do they plan to enforce this?

Neutraligon wrote:How is Utah defining social media? Are smaller website included? What will they do about websites hosted outside of Utah/the US? How exactly do they plan to enforce this?

Here’s what I could gather about your first question, according to official online documents listed below on line 163-228.

The state has no business interfering in what's fundamentally a parenting decision.

Ard al Islam wrote:

Improper Classifications wrote:Utah also voted to make a new flag. Why aren't we talking about that?

That's the real crime. First Mississippi, now Utah? Leave the flags alone!

The Utah flag was a forgettable blue seal flag that basically no one would miss, and the Mississippi flag literally had the Confederate battle flag on in, which isn't a good look when a very considerable part of your population is made up of Black people

Defining 'social media' as anything not in that list. Crock of shit.

Where does 'freedom of association' come into play here, is that federal or state, and if somehow age restricted, why is the government trying to be parents?

The whole thing is asinine, though, so no point in taking issue with details.

Deblar wrote:

Ard al Islam wrote:That's the real crime. First Mississippi, now Utah? Leave the flags alone!

The Utah flag was a forgettable blue seal flag that basically no one would miss, and the Mississippi flag literally had the Confederate battle flag on in, which isn't a good look when a very considerable part of your population is made up of Black people

Yeah, I like the new Mississippi and Utah flags. They're unique.

Wish more states would adopt unique flags. Too many states have the same "state seal on plain background" flag.

Anyway, I'm also curious how Utah actually plans to enforce these social media laws. Haven't looked at the bill yet. I'll look tomorrow.

It is a bad solution with good intentions and the curfew is just weirdly dystopian. A 17 year old won't allowed on social media past 10:30 and before 6:30. Also I am not sure whether that curfew is for everyone or just minors, either way it's weird. And what counts as social media?

Personally, I don't see what they plan to do about places like NS that they have no legal way to prosecute.

Orcuo wrote:According to Vox, the first law, “SB 152”, requires social media companies to verify if the user is under or over 18 years old.

Verify how? Like they've always done? That's not going to get them very far if they want to enforce this. Not that I support this, it's very stupid and impractical.

Morley wrote:It is a bad solution with good intentions and the curfew is just weirdly dystopian. A 17 year old won't allowed on social media past 10:30 and before 6:30. Also I am not sure whether that curfew is for everyone or just minors, either way it's weird. And what counts as social media?

I doubt it’s with good intent. It seems like a lot of these GOP laws, including insane conspiracy theorist parents having the final word on school curriculum, are motivated by a desire to have total control over their children so they aren’t allowed to think independently be groomed into becoming gay transgender communist BLM liberals who dare to disobey their owners.

Ard al Islam wrote:

Improper Classifications wrote:Utah also voted to make a new flag. Why aren't we talking about that?

That's the real crime. First Mississippi, now Utah? Leave the flags alone!

Both of their flags were travesties. At least now Mississippi has a flag that’s not an embarrassment.

El Lazaro wrote:

Morley wrote:It is a bad solution with good intentions and the curfew is just weirdly dystopian. A 17 year old won't allowed on social media past 10:30 and before 6:30. Also I am not sure whether that curfew is for everyone or just minors, either way it's weird. And what counts as social media?

I doubt it’s with good intent. It seems like a lot of these GOP laws, including insane conspiracy theorist parents having the final word on school curriculum, are motivated by a desire to have total control over their children so they aren’t allowed to think independently be groomed into becoming gay transgender communist BLM liberals who dare to disobey their owners.

Yeah, that's what happens when you are a state with a majority of straight cisgender capitalist ALM conservatives who are Mormons with little ability to think in ways not condoned by the church well-meaning and thoughtful members of the LDS church

Deblar wrote:

Ard al Islam wrote:That's the real crime. First Mississippi, now Utah? Leave the flags alone!

The Utah flag was a forgettable blue seal flag that basically no one would miss, and the Mississippi flag literally had the Confederate battle flag on in, which isn't a good look when a very considerable part of your population is made up of Black people

Utah’s new flag is just a photoshopped piece of junk. Mississippi’s new flag removes the classic symbol of Southern pride and heritage. Yup. I said it.

Children should not be on social media, period.

This whole thing just smacks of "good luck..."

This will only serve to further isolate young people struggling with mental illness, gender dysphoria, and abusive families. People who had happy childhoods have no idea how life-saving online friends and communities are for the kids whose home life is shit.

Also, unconstitutional much? Social media is a primary medium for speech and engagement.

But hey, it's Utah, the only state in the US that limits how much caffeine Starbucks can give you.

Page wrote:This will only serve to further isolate young people struggling with mental illness, gender dysphoria, and abusive families. People who had happy childhoods have no idea how life-saving online friends and communities are for the kids whose home life is shit.

You say that as if it wasn't something they wanted...

I can foresee this being a problem for Max Barry and Nationstates at some point.