A new California bill would block social platforms from using algorithmic feeds and autoplay videos for users under 16. Tech companies and digital rights groups warn of First Amendment issues. The decision could change how young people see content online.
California lawmakers are moving forward with a bill that would require social media platforms to turn off algorithmic content recommendations and autoplay videos for users under 16. The measure, Assembly Bill 1709, would update the state’s Protecting Our Kids From Social Media Addiction Act (SB976), which already requires parental consent for algorithmic feeds for users under 18. If AB 1709 becomes law, platforms would have to disable these features for anyone under 16, even if parents approve.
Major tech companies like Google, Meta, and TikTok are already fighting the 2024 law in court, arguing that these rules violate their First Amendment rights to organize and display content. Digital rights groups, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, have asked Governor Gavin Newsom to veto the new bill. They argue that the law would cut teens off from useful information and social connections, and that forcing platforms to remove these features for young users would violate both the platforms’ and teens’ constitutional rights. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, AB 1709 removes the parental consent option that was part of the earlier law, making the ban absolute for those under 16.
Governor Gavin Newsom has until the end of September to decide whether to sign or veto AB 1709, a decision that could set a national precedent for regulating social media features for minors.
For publishers and creators, the proposed ban could change how content is shown and monetized for younger users. Algorithmic feeds and autoplay videos are key to driving engagement and ad revenue, especially among teens. If platforms must turn off these features for under-16s, content discovery and audience growth strategies will need to change, which could reduce organic reach and affect established business models. The bill describes algorithmic recommendations as "addictive," a claim that has drawn criticism from both industry and civil liberties groups. As reported by The Sacramento Bee, critics say these restrictions could make it much harder for platforms to engage and monetize teen audiences.
The legal landscape is still unsettled. In a recent New Mexico case, a judge fined Meta Platforms $567 million and set time limits for teens on Facebook and Instagram, but did not require changes to features like autoplay and algorithmic feeds, citing likely First Amendment violations. This highlights the legal challenges facing California’s proposal and suggests that any enforcement could lead to more lawsuits. The debate is part of a wider national focus on social media’s impact on youth, as seen in recent settlements that require Meta to change its teen engagement practices, as detailed in POLITICO.
California’s effort to restrict algorithmic content for minors directly challenges the business models of social platforms and the creators who rely on them. If the law passes, publishers will have to rethink how they reach and monetize young audiences. The outcome will set a standard for how far states can go in regulating content delivery, and whether courts will support or block these efforts. The industry faces a period of legal uncertainty and operational change as the courts and marketplace test the limits of editorial control and user protection.
Unlike the existing SB 976 law, which allows parental consent for algorithmic recommendations to users under 18, AB 1709 introduces a strict ban for those under 16 with no parental override possible. This marks a significant tightening of regulatory controls over how platforms can serve content to minors in California.
The Sacramento Bee
