Of course, Big Tech’s concern for “protecting user privacy” is just a mirage. Unfortunately, these arguments are gaining traction, scaring many on both the right and left away from supporting this strong federal bipartisan bill or the state efforts that are poised to bring substantial relief to teens and their families. They make these arguments against both the state laws and a federal bill modeled after them, the Protecting Kids on Social Media Act, which would require age verification for social media nationally. Sensing their weak legal position-particularly with the age-verification laws for social media, which regulate children’s ability to contract online, not speech-the Big Tech lobbyists are now shifting from a legal defense to a policy argument: that age verification will destroy user privacy. ACLU) “ the Internet is not as ‘invasive’ as radio or television,” and “sers seldom encounter content by accident.” To prove the point, a recent report by Common Sense Media found that more than half of today’s teens (58 percent) have encountered pornography accidentally. But these precedents-which informed the 2004 Supreme Court ruling in ACLU v. Ashcroft , striking down a federal law requiring age verification for pornography sites-are based on factual predicates that are now demonstrably false-such as (per Reno v. The platforms argue, relying on Supreme Court precedents from the 1990s, that these laws are unconstitutional. By giving parents greater control over their kids’ exposure to social media and pornography, with their documented ill effects, these laws will improve kids’ lives.īut for these laws to prevail, age verification must be shown to be both effective and capable of preserving user privacy. 152, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas and Virginia have all passed laws requiring parental consent and age verification for minors to open social media accounts or access pornography. In the past year, starting with Utah’s Social Media Regulation Act, S.B. if at all.State legislatures are leading a revolution to transform the experience of the internet, and with it, American childhood. While not as incendiary as the n-word, there has been a growing movement for years to have the r-word also stricken from usage as well, as it is offensive and ableist.īelow are some of the ongoing reactions to the controversy as fans wait to see how CBS and Big Brother might respond to this incident. The question comes down to whether or not CBS and those who are surely looking into this think the use of the r-word violates this. It's not zero tolerance unless it's inconvenient for production. What happens to their nominees? Is the entire week a wash? On top of that, Jared being in the house with Cirie is the summer's big twist.Īt the same time, a Zero-Tolerance Policy is just that. Obviously, at this point, it would really throw a wrench in the proceedings of the week to remove the current Head of Household. The incident has triggered a lot of debate on social media, with X (formerly Twitter) blowing up as contestants discuss the word and CBS's lack - at least so far - of response to Jared's comment. So will he be removed from the game? Should he be?īig Brother Blowout: What Happened After HG Ejected for Racial Slur - Plus, First Eviction In other words, as far as they are concerned, Jared is just as much in violation of this policy for his use of the r-word as Luke clearly was for dropping the n-word. He said he'd meant to use another word, and insisted to Jared he didn't mean anything by it.įans were quick to post the CBS Zero-tolerance policy, which says there is an "automatic ban" for various types of conduct, including "Negative Speech or Slurs." This section includes "hate speech or threats of harm" directed at various groups, including race and disability. I’m willing to admit that."Īfter using the n-word, Luke also said he'd messed up. "I don't think she's the r-word," Jared tells Cory in the HOH Room. While the actual usage of the slur doesn't appear to have been caught on the LIve Feeds, Jared's mea culpa with Cory Wurtenberger - who is in a showmance with America - was captured, and he cops to doing it. Making things more complicated from a production standpoint, it was Jared who won HOH, meaning a forcible eviction would be taking out the current HOH.Īfter he nominated Cameron and Red for eviction, Jard was having a conversation with Cory about how bad it would be for his personal game if America won the Power of Veto. The conversation on Friday was a direct result of how things are proceeding this week with alliances and nominees and targets. Big Brother Blowout: Jared Teases Cirie Secret (What Are You Doing?!) - Plus, Who Used the Condoms?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |