The  Minnesota House Commerce Finance and Policy committee talked about HF4400 (Stephenson); Prohibiting Social Media Manipulation Act created, social media platforms regulated, and private right of action and attorney general enforcement provided. (I will replace livestream with archived video when available.)

They heard a report from Attorney General on kids and social media

They heard from a tech association that opposed the bill. They think it will decrease online experience for Minnesotans. They think it might overburden the system and that it might pave the road for racism and other biased views. They also mention free speech and access to information. This will lose in court on first amendment grounds.

Questions:

We know this is an issue. Legal aspects of regulation are a concern. Three areas of concern:
1. Constitutional issues – cannot regulate speech. (US Supreme Court is looking at this)
2. Workability
3. Private right of action is not the way to go.
We look forward to the conversation. Your issues are important. I have mixed feelings on private right of action too.

What about hacking of preferences?
The bill says content has to be based on user preference over engagement.

Can we make the interface accessible? What happens if the user doesn’t set preference?
This bill deals with conflict between stated preference and user engagement.

Is this exclusive to a social media platform? Or can cookies be set up to alter browsing based on stated preferences?
Right now this is for social media but it seems like there could be some ties.

Can we get bipartisan support?
OK.

Bill is rereferred to Judiciary, Finance and Civil Law Committee.