The push to protect children online has become the latest justification for expanding government authority over the internet. In a new RealClearMarkets column, Market Institute Senior Fellow Norm Singleton argues that proposals requiring identity verification for social media users would undermine online privacy, weaken parental authority, and fail to achieve their stated goal.
Singleton examines European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s proposal for a European Union-wide identity verification system for social media users, warning that policies framed as child protection measures often come at the expense of fundamental liberties.
“Respecting parents’ rights to determine when their children are ready for social media allows the parents to monitor their child’s online activities and teach them how to benefit from social media while avoiding its pitfalls while the child is still at an age when they are likely to listen to and follow parental counsel.”
Rather than recognizing that children mature at different rates and that parents are best equipped to make decisions for their families, government-imposed age restrictions assume a one-size-fits-all approach. Singleton argues that these mandates replace parental judgment with bureaucratic control while doing little to address the real challenges children face online.
The article also notes that mandatory age verification systems require users to surrender personal information simply to access online platforms. That creates new privacy risks for every user—not just minors—and makes it easier for governments and private entities to collect and store sensitive personal data.
Singleton also draws parallels to the recently passed Kids Internet and Digital Safety (KIDS) Act in the United States. Although the legislation does not explicitly require age verification, its “knew or should have known” standard creates strong incentives for websites to verify every user’s identity in order to avoid liability.
“Verification, as well as laws forbidding minors from accessing social media, may be well-intentioned efforts to protect children. However, they also usurp the rights of parents to control their children’s social media use, violate the rights of adult social media users, and are ineffective at stopping minors from accessing social media.”
Instead of expanding government surveillance and restricting access to online platforms, Singleton argues policymakers should encourage parents to use the existing tools already available to manage their children’s online activity. Empowering families—not bureaucracies—offers a more effective way to protect children while preserving privacy, free speech, and parental rights.
Read Norm Singleton’s full column as published in RealClearMarkets.
0 Comments