Post Tagged with: "social media ban"

By Soon Koon https://flic.kr/p/PfyH9V CC BY-ND 2.0

Soft Ban or Hard Verification Requirement?: Why Bill C-34’s Social Media Ban Exemption Gets the Incentives Wrong and Comes Too Late to Matter

The debate over Bill C-34’s social media ban for those under sixteen has largely focused on the impact on users, including mandated age verification for millions, the privacy risks of verification technologies, and experience elsewhere suggesting the policy is ineffective. Defenders of the ban have characterized the Canadian approach as a “soft ban” that will allow social media companies to obtain exemptions provided they meet yet-to-be-determined safety standards. This approach is said to create incentives for companies to address safety concerns and qualify for the exemption. But a closer look at the bill reveals that the approach does not work, as even “safe” services will be required to implement age verification for tens of millions of users. By the time the Digital Safety Commission has figured anything out, the services will have verified most of the country and likely lost users in the process. This is true not only for services that require significant design changes, but even those services that today would be widely acknowledged to be safe for children.

Read more ›

June 25, 2026 2 comments News
All Media is Social by Dave King CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 https://flic.kr/p/K3T4aY

The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 273: Rebroadcast of the Globe and Mail’s The Decibel on Canada’s First Steps Towards a Social Media Ban

Bill C-34, the Safe Social Media Act, has quickly become a lightning rod for debate since its introduction earlier this month. The issue that invariably tops the list is the kids’ social media ban. Bill C-34, along with the recently introduced Bill C-36, will be covered from multiple angles in the weeks ahead. For the moment, I am pleased to rebroadcast a recent episode of the Globe and Mail’s The Decibel podcast. I was invited to appear on the program, where I was interviewed by Sherril Sutherland about Bill C-34, the ban, and online harms and safety more broadly. I am grateful to the Globe for granting permission to rebroadcast the episode on my podcast uncut, in its entirety.

Read more ›

June 22, 2026 0 comments Podcasts
Top Secret by Vs Heidelberg https://flic.kr/p/pwTrte CC BY-SA 2.0

The Commission: How Bill C-34 Creates an Internet Super-Regulator That Will Touch the Lives of Millions of Canadians

The proposed kids’ social media ban is capturing the headlines, but lost in the debate over Bill C-34 is that its most consequential element may be the creation and powers of the government agency the bill establishes to oversee the entire system. The Digital Safety Commission of Canada will be a super-regulator of the Internet, with greater influence over the daily lives of Canadians than perhaps any other regulator in the country. The breadth of its influence can’t be overstated: it will set the standards that millions of Canadians must satisfy to verify their age in order to use social media services. It will establish what platforms must do about harmful content, including the removal of certain material. It will determine whether the age-gating requirement may be lifted for any given service. It will both regulate the platforms and advocate for their users, dual roles that raise obvious fairness concerns. And it will exercise investigative and adjudicative powers, complete with penalties, hearings, and formal, law-enforcement-style investigations. Yet despite all those powers, it will not be bound by the rules of evidence, will be free to conduct its hearings in secret, and, at least in the beginning, will be capable of operating as a one-person body in which the Commission and its Chair are one and the same individual. The full scope of the new powers is illustrated in the infographic below.

Read more ›

June 15, 2026 6 comments News
Law to Be Named Later, Exemption Illusion

Taking Stock of Bill C-34: Five Things to Know About the Government’s Plan for a Kids’ Social Media Ban, Mandated Age Verification, and AI Chatbot Rules

This past week in digital policy was dominated by Bill C-34, the Safe Social Media Act, which includes platform regulation, an under-16 social media ban backed by mandated age verification, a new AI chatbot regulatory regime, and the creation of a powerful Digital Safety Commission. I have posted daily on the bill, including my initial review, an examination of the 50 key decisions the bill leaves for later, and a closer look at the government’s fast-track implementation plan, alongside a FAQ and posts on mandated ID and trade risks that I published just before the bill was tabled. For those coming to the issue fresh, this post draws on the week’s posts by taking stock of where things stand.

Read more ›

June 13, 2026 3 comments News
No Ban - No Wall - No Raids by ep_jhu https://flic.kr/p/RtQNpo CC BY-NC 2.0

The Exemption Illusion: Why the Government’s Plan to Fast Track Bill C-34’s Kids’ Social Media Ban Means No Standards, No Privacy Review, and No Enforcement

One of the most heavily promoted features of Bill C-34, the government’s Safe Social Media Act, is that its social media ban for those under 16 comes with a potential exemption for platforms that satisfy the new Digital Safety Commission that they provide adequate safeguards for children. But based on comments from government officials, it appears the exemption is an illusion, at least for years to come. The legislation carefully sets out how the ban is supposed to work, but officials at a technical briefing on the bill this week described a very different plan that involves moving quickly after Royal Assent with regulations to bring the ban into force without waiting for the Digital Safety Commission to be fully operational. No Commission means no age verification standards, no privacy review, no exemption, and no effective enforcement. It also creates huge risks since the initial start of the ban is when tens of millions of Canadians would be required to verify their age, yet the government is sidelining the privacy protections written into its own bill and essentially conceding that the ban is unlikely to carry any real consequences for those services that fail to comply when it first takes effect.

Read more ›

June 12, 2026 2 comments News