Social Media Becomes Illegal For Florida Teens
Gov. Desantis continues his cyclonic post-presidential revenge tour
In a display of what can only be described as legislative hubris, the state of Florida has embarked upon yet another quixotic quest to regulate the digital realm. Governor Ronald Dion DeSantis, flanked by his legal cohorts, defiantly affixed his signature to a bill aimed at prying children away from the clutches of social-media platforms. This will ultimately include any website or online entity that DeSantis deems an obstacle to his clubbing of the baby seals of free speech and free thought in the former Sunshine State. Discussions of climate change are now fully illegal in the public school systems as the National Hurricane Center in Miami, FL meanwhile considers inventing category 6 hurricanes.
One can almost hear the echoing cries of Attorney General Ashley Moody, vowing to wage a legal crusade to defend this dubious decree. And what, pray tell, is the crux of this contentious legislation? A mandate seeking to bar children under the tender age of 16 from partaking in the digital discourse of social media, with a begrudging concession allowing parental consent for those teetering on the brink of adolescence. And, if those parents do allow for such an account, they may be simultaneously breaking the law – a sure fire way to quash discussions of climate change, issues concerning israel and Palestine, women’s, LGBTQ+, and civil rights – the domain of the modern teenager.
The proponents of this measure, led by House Speaker Paul Renner, invoke concerns about the deleterious effects of social media on youthful psyches and the specter of unsavory characters lurking in cyberspace. Yet, many of those unsavory characters occupy chairs in the state capital. Such characters have even sat in the White House with friends like Jeffrey Epstein on speed dial.
NetChoice, a stalwart defender of digital liberties, minced no words in their denunciation of the bill, decrying its infringement upon the sacrosanct domain of free speech. With a resounding flourish, they warned that such draconian measures would safeguard precisely zero Floridians, a scathing rebuke to the bill's purported intentions.
Renner, the bill's staunch defender, contends that its focus lies not on the content disseminated but rather on the addictive allure of social-media platforms. Such a disingenuous assertion seeks to cloak the bill's true intent under the veil of protecting impressionable minds while sidestepping constitutional scrutiny.
However, the bill's language remains as vague as the promises of a snake oil peddler, failing to even name the platforms it seeks to corral. Instead, it dabbles in nebulous terms like "addictive features," leaving the door wide open for judicial interpretation and inevitable legal skirmishes. Meanwhile, Governor DeSantis has signed into law the opportunity to purchase wine in bottles larger than 1 gallon to ensure alcohol’s addictive features.
In a bewildering turn of events, Governor DeSantis, himself a legal hunchback, previously vetoed a similar bill citing constitutional concerns, only to capitulate and sign a revised version into law. This volte-face included concessions such as allowing parental consent for 14- and 15-year-olds to join the digital fray, a token gesture to assuage critics. Alongside, Governor DeSantis has also rolled back child labor laws so that the ghost of Charles Dickens can, again, feel the love. Of course, most Dickens’ books have been banned from Florida public libraries.
Yet, buried within the bill's labyrinthine passages lies a provision ostensibly aimed at shielding minors from online depravity, a fleeting mention lost amidst the cacophony of constitutional discord.
As the dust settles and legal battle lines are drawn, one thing remains abundantly clear: the tempestuous relationship between Florida and the digital realm shows no signs of abating. In the face of mounting legal challenges and stark warnings from industry watchdogs, the Sunshine State marches forward, heedless of the looming specter of judicial rebuke.
In the immortal words of House Speaker Renner, "This is an issue where we can no longer stand on the sidelines because of what we know." Indeed, the battleground for digital liberties has been unequivocally drawn, and the ramifications of this legislative gambit will reverberate far beyond the shores of the Sunshine State.
I disagree with the premise that those topics are the domain of children. I have a 17 year old son who is likely more mature than many adults yet his lifetime experience and culmination of wisdom would likely add nothing to the subjects you consider theirs…
In addition he will be eligible to vote this election and that has me thinking about just how much influence people who know nothing but think they know everything are able to alter the world for people who are much more competent than they are.
But we now live in a society where the two top adults are biden and trump so I guess with all things considered it makes sense as a connected idea but are we really okay with reality being like this?