New York To Require Social Media Platforms To Display Mental Health Warnings (reuters.com)
- Reference: 0180461917
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/12/26/237210/new-york-to-require-social-media-platforms-to-display-mental-health-warnings
- Source link: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/new-york-require-social-media-platforms-display-mental-health-warnings-2025-12-26/
> "Keeping New Yorkers safe has been my top priority since taking office, and that includes protecting our kids from the potential harms of social media features that encourage excessive use," Hochul said in a statement.
>
> This month Australia imposed a social media ban for children under 16. New York joins states like California and Minnesota that have similar social media laws. The New York law includes platforms that offer "addictive feeds," auto play or infinite scroll, according to the legislation. The law applies to conduct occurring partly or wholly in New York but not when the platform is accessed by users physically outside the state.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/new-york-require-social-media-platforms-display-mental-health-warnings-2025-12-26/
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. Call their bluff - NY can't do anything against any of these companies. All of them are headquartered ~2900 miles away.
Re: (Score:2)
Where they are headquartered doesn't matter. What matters is if they have a legal presence in the state. If they do, that presence, at least, is subject to their laws, including all the various enforcement mechanisms, like fines (and seized bank accounts if necessary), and even jail time for contempt.
If they don't - of if they abandon anything that can be moved - then they're not.
Re: What happens if these platforms don't? (Score:2)
In theory, yes, but that's not what we see in practice. Data abuse is really just too conceptual for people, but politicians specifically, to understand .
Just sayin, the companies have the upper hand in messaging and its pretty clear now the pols want the status quo, they like surveillance and social media. They have no impetus to do the right thing for society .
Re: (Score:2)
Presumably some politicians are trying to change things up? Otherwise there wouldn't be a move for the platforms to display warnings.
We're going to lose the word "algorithm" (Score:2)
> algorithmic feeds
We need to find, capture, try, execute, and then piss on the grave of whoever decided that the word "algorithm" was the best word for what they didn't like about Facebook. Their hasty decision, combined the word's apparent mainstream sexiness (who knew?!) is going to result in the word's loss.
Re: We're going to lose the word "algorithm" (Score:1)
Outside of the adjectival form "algorithmic complexity," often interchangeable with "computational complexity," I can't say I used the word at all in a technical sense.
It may have been used liberally in my 8th grade algebra class or my 9th grade geometry class, but I don't really remember at this point.
Re: We're going to lose the word "algorithm" (Score:2)
What ?! I thought "algorithmic" was good for the nerd brand.
But I doubt that deters anyone from using some app. Business will probably double or make work for consultants. Also doesn't prohibition, all that mystery that the native mind sees, doesn't that really reinforce the brand? Camel cigarette, anyone?
In related news ... (Score:2)
... social media platforms will display mental health warnings attached to New York sites.
Good move (Score:3)
We have warning labels on cigarettes and those are pretty uncontroversial.
It's also uncontroversial that social media platforms [1]know that their platforms are harmful. [reuters.com]
While I would prefer an outright ban on platforms using known-harmful practices, I'm OK with warnings.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/meta-buried-causal-evidence-social-media-harm-us-court-filings-allege-2025-11-23/
Has the One Weird Trick ever worked? (Score:1)
Social media is a medium. It isn't the problem.
Alcohol, nicotine, and THC are chemicals. They aren't the problem.
Porn, gore, and gangsta rap are just scripted content. They are not the problem.
The problem is, and always been, between the ears of people who cannot make themselves moderate their intake.
I posit that it is absolutely incoherent worldview that wants warning labels and bans on social media, but tolerates and celebrates sex, drugs, rock-and-roll, state-sactioned gambling and outright state-run gam
Re: (Score:3)
There have been aggressive anti-smoking campaigns and smoking rates in countries that have these campaigns have dropped significantly. For example, in Canada, smoking rates [1]dropped from 50% in 1965 to 10% in 2020 [uwaterloo.ca], a significant savings to our healthcare system.
So yeah, while warning labels etc. obviously don't work for everyone, they work for some people and can reduce the scale of a problem.
As for your other points: There's nothing wrong with sex if it's done safely, and that's why countries with prop
[1] https://uwaterloo.ca/tobacco-use-canada/adult-tobacco-use/smoking-canada/historical-trends-smoking-prevalence
They should call it the red flag law (Score:2)
Alas, they've already abused that for gun confiscation laws. Shame, it would have matched requiring cars to follow a man waving a flag.
Platform Label Key (Score:3)
Slashdot: Autistic and straight up retarded.
Facebook: Dementia and Alzheimers
X.com: WTF?
Reddit: Foreign agent mind control.
Re: (Score:1)
> Slashdot: Autistic and straight up retarded.
Slashdot: cisgender neuro divergent
Ftfy.
Re: (Score:2)
rsilvergun. is not in New York.
Re: Platform Label Key (Score:1)
> Slashdot: cisgender neuro divergent
> Ftfy.
Slashdot: not a sex weirdo but often pretentious.
Ftftfy
Re: Platform Label Key (Score:1)
Tiktok: CCP front opera--ooh shiny!