Podcasts about Online Privacy Protection Act

The amount of time children and adolescents spend with a screen is absolutely stunning. Lots of people, including parents, health leaders, educators, elected leaders from both parties I might mention, and even children themselves, are highly concerned and are discussing what might be done about all this. I'm delighted to begin this series of podcasts on children and screen time. Today we're welcoming two very special guests who can talk about this topic in general, and especially about what's being done to protect children and adolescents. Several podcasts will follow this one that deal with food and nutrition in particular. Our first guest, Kris Perry, is Executive Director of Children and Screens, an organization devoted to protecting children. In the digital world by addressing media's impact on child development, communicating state-of-the-art information, and working with policymakers. Prior to joining children in Screens, Kris was senior advisor of the Governor of California and Deputy Secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency. Our other guest, Dr. Dimitri Christakis is a professor of pediatrics at the University of Washington School of Medicine, and director of the Center for Child Health Behavior and Development at Seattle Children's. He's also editor-in-chief of JAMA Pediatrics and both Chief Scientific Officer and Chair of the Scientific Advisory Board of Children and Screens. He's also the co-editor of a new book that I'm very excited to discuss. Interview Summary Download The Handbook of Children and Screens: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-69362-5 Kris, let's start with you. Could you set the stage and give us some sense of how much time children spend in front of screens, children and adolescents, and what devices are being used and what kind of trends are you seeing? Yes, I'd be happy to. I had better news for your listeners, but as you might imagine, since the advent of the smartphone and social media, the youth digital media use has been increasing each year. Especially as children get older and have increasing demands on their time to use screens. But let's just start at the beginning of the lifespan and talk about kids under the age of two who shockingly are spending as much as two hours a day on screens. Most spend about 50 minutes, but there's a significant chunk spending up to two hours. And that rises to three or three to five hours in childhood. And eventually in adolescence, approximately eight and a half hours a day our adolescents are spending online. Also wanted to talk a little bit about middle childhood children, six to 12 years of age. 70% of them already have a social media account, and we all know social media wasn't designed for children. And there are restrictions on children under 13 using them, and yet children six to 12 most have an account already. Over half of four-year-olds have a tablet and two thirds of children have their own device by the age of eight; and 90% of teens. This probably won't be surprising, and yet we should really think about what this means; that 90% of teens are using YouTube, 60% are on TikTok and Instagram, and 55% use Snapchat. I'll stop by ending on a really alarming statistic. Oh my, there's more? There's more. I know it! I told you. I'll be the bearer of bad news so that we can talk about solutions later. But, children are checking their devices as often as 300 times per day. 300 times. 300 times per day, and we're talking about screen time right now. And we know that when you're using time to be on screens, you are not doing something else. And we know that childhood is full of challenges and skill building and mastery that requires repetition and tenacity and grit and effort. And the more children are on their screens, whether it's social media or other entertainment, they're not doing one of these other critical child development tasks. That's pretty amazing. And the fact that the older kids are spending more time on before a screen than they are in school is pretty alarming. And the younger, the really youngest kids, that's especially alarming. So, Dimitri, why should we fret about this? And I realize that fret is kind of a mild word here. Maybe all I'll panic would be better. But what are some of the major concerns? Well, I don't think panic is ever the right reaction, but the numbers Kris conveyed, you know, I think do paint a, let's say, concerning story. You know, the simple reality is that there's only so much time in a day. And if you think about it, teenagers in particular should sleep for eight to 10 hours a day at a minimum. They really should be in school six and a half, seven hours a day. And then when you add the numbers, Kris conveyed, you realize that something's giving because there isn't enough time left to spend eight and a half hours a day. The two things at a minimum that are giving are sleep. Kids are losing sleep to be on screens. And I'm sorry to say that they're losing school while they're on screens. We just published a paper that used passive sensing to see where and when children are on their screens. And found that the typical child in the United States spends an hour and a half during the school day on their device. And it's not, before any of your guests ask, on Wikipedia or Encyclopedia Britannica. It's on the usual suspects of social media, TikTok, etc. So, you know, we talk about displacement, and I think it's pretty obvious what's being displaced during school hours. Its time focused on learning if it's in the classroom, and time focused on being authentically present in real time and space if it's during recess. School hours are precious in that way, and I think it is concerning that they're spending that much time in school. And I told you the median. Of course, some kids are above that, a significant half of them are above it. And at the high end, they're spending 30 to 40% of school time on screens. Now, some schools have enacted policies. They don't typically enforce them very well. One of the things that drives me nuts, Kelly, is that as an academic, you know we love to argue amongst ourselves and hem and haw. And this issue about whether or not there's such a phenomenon as digital addiction is still being hotly debated. Honestly, the only behavioral addiction that's being seriously considered at this point is gaming disorder. The DSM-5 didn't consider gaming, considered it, but didn't include, it said it needed further study in 2013. In 2022, the WHO did include gaming disorder as an ICD-11 diagnosis. But just as further evidence how slow science is compared to technology., I mean gaming, while it's still an entity, represents a small fraction of most people's screen time. And the numbers that Kris conveyed, a small fraction of that for some on average was gaming. For some people, it's their screen use of choice, but for many, it's social media. YouTube, although I consider YouTube to be a social media, etc. And at the high end when you hear the numbers Kris conveyed in my mind that's a behavioral addiction any way you define it. Well, and if you think about things that we all agree are addictive, like nicotine and alcohol and heroin, people aren't doing it 300 times a day. So it's really pretty remarkable. And that's exactly right. One of the salient criteria for those addictions is that it's interfering with activities of daily living. Well, you can't be on a screen for nine hours a day when you're supposed to be asleep for 10 and at school for six without interfering with activities of day. The math isn't there. And things like being physically active and going out and playing. That's right. It doesn't add up. So, you don't need the DSM-5. You don't need a psychiatrist. You need a mathematician to tell you that there's too much time on this thing. Alright, so Kris, talk to us if you will, about the Children and Screens organization. I have a lot of respect for the organization and its work. Tell us how it got started and what its objectives are. Well, it's so great to be on this show with you and get to see you in your day job, Kelly. Because you've been an advisor, like Dimitri, to the institute almost since its inception, which is in 2013. As you know, our founder, Dr. Pamela Hurst-Della Pietra, really became concerned as a parent about the way digital media was impacting her children and sought out some answers. Well, what does this mean? Why is this happening? What should I do? And found out that this, of course, is 2013, this is a long time ago. There wasn't that much research yet. And it was multidisciplinary. In other words, there might be a study among neuroscientists or developmental psychologists, even ophthalmologists. But there really hadn't been, yet, a concerted effort to bring these different disciplines and the research together to try to answer some of these hard questions about the impact on kids. And lo and behold, here we are, almost 13 years since the advent of the smartphone and social media. And there is an astounding amount of research across disciplines. So, what we do at the institute is we try to translate it as fast as we can and make it actionable for parents, providers, and policy makers. And we do that through our Ask the Experts webinar series where we bring the experts themselves directly to our audience to talk about these impacts and answer questions. We also create printables, you might say, like tip sheets and Research at a Glance Digest, and newsletters and FAQs and we've upgraded our website to make it very navigable for parents of kids of all ages. I even started my own podcast this year, which has been really fun. Dimitri was my first guest, so it's great to see him here. And we have convenings. We're having our third Digital Media Developing Mind Scientific Congress this summer where the experts come together in person to discuss issues. And we really try to focus them on advancing research and supporting it, translating it, and positioning the issue as a policy priority. We'll be in Washington, DC where we know lawmakers are grappling with the impact of digital media on child development, how to make online, products safer for kids and protect their data. The Institute is in the middle of all of this, trying to facilitate more discussion, more results and more support for parents primarily. Kris, a couple of things occur to me. One is that the breadth of work you do is really very impressive because you're not only having very hands-on kind of in the real world ex advice for parents on how to navigate this world, but you have advice for and helpful resources for policy makers and for researchers and people. It's really quite an impressive breadth of work. The other thing that occurred to me is that I don't think you and I would have any podcast career at all if it hadn't been for Dimitri helping us out. So thanks Dimitri. Yeah. So, let me ask you, Dimitri, so I know that both you and Kris are committed to an evidence-based approach to making policy. Yeah. But technology advances way more quickly than scientists can evaluate it. Much less come up with policies to deal with it. And by the time research gets funded, completed, published, you're on to eight new levels of technology. So how does one handle this fundamental problem of pace? It's a really good question. I mean, I can tell you that we should at a minimum learn from the mistakes we've made in the past. And, you know, one of the most critical, frankly, that most people don't really understand is that we talk about the age at which children get social media accounts in this country. Kris pointed out that actually pre-teens routinely have social media accounts. Social media companies do very little to age gate. They're trying to do more now, but even the age at which we've accepted it is being normative is 13. Few people know where that comes from. That doesn't come from talking to pediatricians, psychologists, parents about what age is the appropriate age. It comes entirely from COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act), which basically was the original privacy act that said that before the age of 13, companies could not collect data from children. So, because these companies were interested in collecting data, they set the age at 13 so as to not have any constraints on the data they collected. Well, that's not even common sense-based policy, let alone evidence-based policy. And it's never been revisited since. It's very troubling to me. And as things move forward, I think we have to learn from those mistakes. Medicine has a maxim which is do no harm. We use that phrase a lot and I think it's a good one in this case. I think it's a particularly good one as we see the new technologies emerging around artificial intelligence. And you know, again, like any new technology, it has incredible upside. We made the mistake and we're still paying for it, about not appreciating the downsides of social network sites, and frankly, the internet in general. And I would hope we put guardrails in place now. And if you will apply the same standard we apply to other non-technology based products. You can't introduce a new pharmaceutical to anybody, let alone to children, until you show it's safe and effective. You can't bring toys to the world that are dangerous. Why do we have more safety precautions around toys than we do around websites for children? You know, a lot of it involves changing defaults, doesn't it? Because if the default is that government or somebody out there has to prove that something is harmful before it gets taken away. That changes everything then if you began at a different point where these companies have to prove that these things are safe. Correct. Or they're permitted. Then the companies would find workarounds and they would play games with that too, but at least that would help some. Well, it would help some. And at least we'd be philosophically in the right place. By the way, Kris didn't say it, so I'll say it. You know, the mission of Children and Screens, lest we sound like Luddites here, is not get kids away from technology. Take away their smartphones. We all recognize that technology is here to stay. I think all of us appreciate the incredible upside that it brings to children's lives. The mission of Children and Screens is to help children lead healthy lives in a digital world. And part of the reason she and I often talk about the concerns we have is because the pros make the case for themselves. I mean, you know, no one needs to come here and tell you how amazing it is that you could Google something or that you could get somewhere with GPS. I mean, we know it's amazing and we all rely on it. And none of us are ever talking about getting rid of that stuff. That makes good sense. It's like, you know, children benefit from the fact that they can get around with their parents in the automobile. But you want to have car seats in there to protect them. Exactly. And that's exactly right. There needs to be assurances of safety and they're none. I mean, they're really virtually none. The age getting is a joke. And even if we accept it as effective, the age set of 13 is too young, in my opinion. We started this conversation talking about these medias being addictive, I believe they're addictive. There are legitimate academics that will debate me on that, and I'm happy to join that debate. But as I said before, it's a tough argument to win when people spending upwards of 10 to 16 hours a day doing it. I don't know what you call that besides addictive. We can argue about what percentage are doing that, but nevertheless, once you accept something as addictive, for other addictive things we immediately age gate it above 18 or 21, right? Mm-hmm. We don't believe that the teenagers have the ability to regulate their alcohol or tobacco or gambling, all of which we accept are addictive. In fact, in the case of alcohol, we raised the age from 18 to 21 because we thought even 18-year-olds weren't able to do it. And yet somehow for this behavior, we think of it as just so different that it doesn't require greater cognitive capacity. And I don't believe that. Yeah, very good point. Kris, let me ask you a question about how you and your colleagues at Children and Screens set priorities because there are a lot of things that one could potentially worry about as outcomes. There's violence that kids see on social media. There's cognitive and brain development, social developments, social interactions, and bullying. Mental health, body image, diet, all these things are out there. How do you decide what to work on? Well, we try to work on all of it. And in fact, we've built up a fair amount of expertise and resources around almost 25 different topics. And we also understand that, you know, childhood is a long period of time. Birth to 18, birth to 21, birth to 25, depending on who you talk to. So, we're able to take those 25 topics and also provide deeper, you might say, resources that address the different stages of development. We're really trying to do as much as we can. What's been interesting over these last few years is trying to figure out when to be reactive, when to be proactive. And by being proactive, we go out looking for the research, translating it, digesting it, and creating materials with it that we think are really accessible and actionable. At the same time, as Dimitri points out, there are policy windows and there are opportunities that present themselves that you have to react to. If you just only talk about what you want to talk about to each other you're missing some of these external opportunities to inform policy and policy makers. Help influence the way that parents and providers are talking about the issue. Framing it in such a way that engages youth and makes them want what we want for them. We're really excited by increasing opportunities to partner in coalitions with others that care about kids and teachers and nurses and doctors. But we also are speaking directly to leaders in states and school districts at the federal level, at the local level. You would be, I'm sure, not surprised to hear that we are contacted every day by groups that support parents and families. Asking for resources, asking for support, because they're seeing the impact now over many years on their children, their development. Their academic ability. Their cognitive and analytical ability. Their social emotional ability. Their ability to pay attention to tasks that we all know are critical in building that foundation for essentially, you know, future success. The Institute is being pulled in many directions. Ee try really hard to be strategic about what are people asking us for? What does the research say and how can we get that to them as quickly as possible? Dimitri - Can I add to that? You know, I want to emphasize that the concern around the effects of screen use on children's lives is shared by parents on both sides of the aisle. 75% of parents are concerned about the impact of screens on their children's lives. 35% of teenagers are concerned about their dependents on screens and that it has a negative effect on their lives. Actually by some studies, some surveys, even more than 35 to 50% of teenagers are concerned. And both sides of the political aisle agree in large part of this. And Kris and Kelly, you guys are the policy wonks, you can speak more to that. So it's a serious indictment on us as grownups and as a society that we have not done more to deliver on this issue. Why? When there's bipartisan agreement amongst many policymakers. This is not a political [00:22:00] issue to speak of and there is widespread concern on the part of parents and even teenagers. Why is nothing happening? Well, one has to look no further than where the money is. And that's a problem. I mean, that's a serious indictment on our political system when we can't deliver something that is needed and basically wanted by everybody but the industry itself. We'll come back and talk in a few moments about the policy issues and where industry gets involved here. But let me take just a bit of a detour from that and talk about the book that I mentioned earlier, because I think it's such a valuable resource. Now, when I mention the name of this book I'm urging our listeners to write this down or to remember it because you can get the book at no cost. And I'll come back, Kris, and explain what made that possible and why the decision was to make this an open access book. But Dimitri, let's begin with you. So you, along with Lauren Hale, edited this book that's entitled, The Handbook of Children and Screens: Digital Media Development and Wellbeing From Birth Through Adolescence. I think it's an extraordinary piece of work, but tell, tell us about the book.  It was an extraordinary undertaking. There's I think 178 or 180 authors. Literally, it's a who's who of experts in children and media research in all disciplines. It represents pediatrics, psychiatry, psychology, communications experts, demography, lawyers, neuroscientists. I don't know who I'm forgetting. Every single discipline is represented. Leading scientists in all of those areas. Virtually every topic that someone might be of interest to people. And we deliberately made the chapters short and easily accessible. So, it is, I think, a great resource for the constituents we serve. For teachers, for parents, for researchers, for policymakers. And it is free. The hardest part of it, to be honest, as an editor, was getting peer reviewers because unfortunately, every expert was conflicted since they all had an article in it. But it was a long time coming. And again, this was really the brainchild of Pam (Pamela Hurst-Della Pietra) and we're grateful to have brought it along. So, you go all the way from the neuroscience, how children's brains are reacting to this, all the way out there into the public policy and legal arena about what can be done about it. And then kind of everything in between. It's remarkable how much the book covers. It's almost a thousand pages. I mean, it is a tome to be sure. And don't forget to mention, Dimitri, we aren't even two months post publication, and we have 1.6 million views of the document, despite its gargantuan size. I think that is really a tribute to experts like you and others that have really studied this issue and can speak directly to its impacts. It's been great to see the success so far. You know, not a small number of those views is from me logging on. And then a million from me and then we got there. So, it is free because it's online and you can download it. You can also order a hard copy for I think, $60, but I'm not sure why you would do that if you can download it for free. But it's up to you. So, Kris, it's unusual for a book like this to be made open access and free to the general public. What made that possible and why was that so important? We want the maximum number of people to use it and treat it like the premier resource that it is. And the only way you can really do that is to fund it to be open access and find a publisher that does open access publishing, which we did with Springer. I mean, most journal articles are behind a paywall and publishers do require you to purchase either a subscription or the document itself to download it or order it. And we just really wanted maximum access. So, we funded it to be published in that way. And I think honestly, it helped us even sort of create it in the first place. People want to be a part of something that has that level of access and is available so widely. So, I think it was a kind of mutually beneficial. It gets more people to read it, but it got more people to write for it too, I think. Right, Dimitri? Dimitri - I agree. I mean, you know, the numbers 1.6 million are extraordinary. I mean, Kelly, you've been internal editor. I mean, as a editor of JAMA Pediatrics, if an article gets 70,000 views, it's in our top 1%, you know, 200,000 views is 0.01%. 1.6 million in growing is really extraordinary. And that's about the number of people that read my articles. 1.6. And of course, they're not all scientists. I mean, many of them are parents and maybe are policy makers, but that's Kris's point, you know. The moment anyone hits a paywall, even if it's a dollar or two, they're going to walk away. It's great to see it get so much traction. Alright, so again, for our listeners, the title of the book is The Handbook of Children and Screens. And it's really a terrific resource. Alright, so let's turn our attention to a really important matter. And we've sort of touched on this, but who's in charge of protecting our children? You know, Dimitri at the end of the day help survey this landscape for us. I mean, is it congress, is it the administrative branch of government? What role do the courts play? Are there legal actors taking meaningful action? What's being done does it come anywhere near, meeting the need. Tell us about what that landscape is like? Well, there isn't adequate protections for children. And we talked a little bit about that earlier. There's been an enormous loophole, unfortunately, created by Congress when they added the Section 230 to the Communications Decency Act in 1996. And that was put in place essentially to provide protections for internet companies. And it basically said that they should be treated like bookstores and not publishers. That they weren't responsible for content they were just conveying it. And what that means, in effect, was that the companies had sort of carte blanche to do whatever they want. And they've used that very effectively, legally, to argue that any restriction, any culpability on their part, is protected by that Act. That they're exonified for any ill that occurs as a result of their product. The only exception that's been made of it, to date, was around sex trafficking on back page, if anyone remembers that. But other than that, social media sites and internet sites in general have been able to say that they're not liable for anything that's done. And I think that was a huge mistake that was made. It needs to be rectified. It's being challenged in the courts presently. My own belief is that, and I'm not speaking as a lawyer, is that when that law was passed, it was under the assumption as I said, that they were just conveying information. No one at the time foresaw the development of algorithms that would feed the information. It's really not a bookstore when you are making recommendations. Once you start recommending things, I think you're no longer merely a purveyor of product. You're actually pushing it. So, Kris, tell us about the Children and Screens and the role the organization plays in this space. And how do you deal with policy and is it possible to be bipartisan? Yeah, I mean, it's essential. There's no way to get anything done, anywhere on these policy matters at a population level without working in a bipartisan or non-partisan manner, which is what we've always done. And it's easy to do that when you're following the science, not ideology. And you're putting the science first and you're creating resources and tools and support for those mostly staffers, honestly, that are trying to help their bosses get smarter and better at talking about these issues as they evolve and become more complicated over time. It takes more effort to staff a lawmaker on this front. And they're very anxious to learn and understand because they're meeting with parents of children who have been harmed. Or frankly didn't even survive their childhood because of the social media platform. There's great urgency on the part of policymakers. We've heard everything from school phone bans to outright social media bans proposed as policies. And one thing I like to come back to is it's one thing to want to take action and make your best guess at what would have the best impact. But it's another thing to study whether or not that policy actually achieved its result. And it's a part of this that by staying bipartisan, nonpartisan allows us to say, 'Hey lawmaker, if you're able to get that to happen, we'd really like to come in and help study whether or not your idea actually achieves the results that you wanted, or if it needs to be adjusted or amended over time.' Fantastic. That's so important to be doing that work, and I'm delighted the organization is doing it. Let me ask a question here. If you think about some of the areas of public health that I've been following, like tobacco, for example. Opioids more recently. Vaping products. And in the case of my own particular work food policy. The administrative legislative branches of government have been almost completely ineffective. If I think about food policy over the years, relatively little has been accomplished. Even though lots of people have worked really hard on it. Same thing happened with tobacco for many years. Opioids, same thing.  And it's until you get the third branch of government involved, the judiciary, and you start suing the actors who were causing the harm do you get much action. Not only do the lawsuits seem to have an effect, but they soften the ground for legislative things that then can occur because public opinion has changed. And then those things help make a difference as well. What do you think about that kind of issue in this space?  I think you're exactly right. I mean, I think the failure of our legislative branch to enact policy leaves us with very few options at this point anyway, except to try to pursue it through the judiciary. There are challenges there. First and foremost, it's a big and well-funded industry, not unlike tobacco or big food, as you mentioned and there's this Section 230 that's given them kind of blanket immunity to date. But there are many, many very large pending cases in several jurisdictions brought by individuals, brought by school districts, brought by states. And those, at least provisionally have gotten further than prior cases have with which have been thrown out based on Section 230. So, we'll see what happens with that litigation. But right now, my guess is it's the best chance we have to set some guardrails. And I think there are plenty of guardrails that could be set. Everything that these companies have done to make their products addictive can be undone. Can be made protective. The tobacco company deliberately designed their products to be addictive. While they tried to make the claims that they were less addictive, you know. They made light cigarettes that had holes in the filter so that it would diffuse the carbon and nicotine, but people quickly learned they could cover those up with their fingers and think they were smoking light cigarettes, and smoke more of them. There's a lot of things that can be done in this space to undesign the problematic nature of the products. And quite apart from the financial settlements, which will get companies attention, I hope that that's part of any settlement if it gets that far. It'll be interesting to see where those go. And, also historically, one important part of these lawsuits is what gets turned up in discovery. And what sort of intent the companies have and how much do they know about harms. And how much do they know about addiction and things like that. And how they might have proceeded in the face of that information that then doesn't get disclosed to the public. In any event, we'll see where that goes. Dimitri, what about the argument that responsibility resides with parents. It's up to parents to protect their kids from this, and government doesn't need to be involved. I've never understood that argument. I mean parents obviously are children's most important safeguard, but as a society, we enact policies and laws to assist parents in that. I mean to me, if I made the argument, well, why, why do we have minimum ages of drinking. It's parents' job to make sure their kids don't drink. How would that possibly play out? Look, it's hard enough as a parent anyway, because kids do get around these laws. But we still have them and it's a lot easier as a parent. I think most parents would agree their life's made easier by minimum age restrictions on certain things. We have seatbelt laws. I mean, why do we have seatbelt laws? Why don't we just tell its parents' job to make sure their kids buckle up? The truth is its society and parents working hand in hand to try and keep children safe. And I think it also helps parents to be able to say that there are laws around this, and I expect you to follow the laws. So, I don't think it's an either or. Okay, well, I think that's a very good way to frame it. There are many, many precedents where we protect children. And why not do it here too? So let me end with a question I'd like to ask both of you. So, in this sea of concerns that we've discussed, is there a reason for optimism? And Kris, let me start, start with you. What do you think? Absolutely. I think the young people I've met that are leading among their peers are incredibly impressive and are armed with the research and their energy and their own lived experience in ways that are very compelling. At the same time, I think the vast amount of research that has now been compiled and translated and acted upon, whether in courtrooms or in state houses, it's becoming more, and we're all getting more steeped and aware of more nuanced information. And finally, I would just say, there is a tipping point. We are reaching as a society, adults and kids alike, we are reaching a tipping point where we can't withstand the pressure of technology in every aspect, every corner of our day, our life. And we want relief. We deserve relief. And I think that's what's going to take us over the finish line. Good. Well, I'm glad to hear those optimistic notes. Dimitri, what about you? I can find reasons to be optimistic. I mean, look, the reality is that technologies have enriched our lives in many ways. And I think if we put guardrails in place, we can make sure that future ones do even better. I have a piece coming out in JAMA Pediatrics around the use of AI, which people are very concerned about, I think rightly. But specifically, about the use of AI and people with intellectual developmental disabilities, making the use case, that there are ways in which it could be extremely beneficial to that population. A population I care deeply about in my role as the Chief Health Officer at Special Olympics International. And in particular, let's say in terms of the doctor patient interaction where it could facilitate their communication with their provider, and it could also help the provider better communicate with them. Look, that use case isn't going to be a priority for the purveyors of artificial intelligence. It's a small, non-lucrative use of a technology. But it's a good one. And if we created the right incentives and put in the right guardrails, we could find many other ways that technology can serve the needs of all of us going forward. I think the problem is that we've tended to be reactive rather than proactive. And to not start with the do no harm first premise, particularly when it comes to children. AI is another example of that where I hope we don't make the same mistake we made with social media. Bios Kris Perry is the executive director of the Children and Screens Institute. Kris most recently served as Senior Advisor to Governor Gavin Newsom of California and Deputy Secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency where she led the development of the California Master Plan for Early Learning and Care and the expansion of access to high-quality early childhood programs. She led systems change efforts at the local, state and national levels in her roles as executive director of First 5 San Mateo, First 5 California and of the First Five Years Fund. Through it all, Perry has fought to protect children, improve and expand early learning programs, and increase investments in low-income children. Perry was instrumental in returning marriage equality to California after the landmark 2013 U.S. Supreme Court ruling Hollingsworth v. Perry, which she wrote about in her book Love on Trial (Roaring Forties Press, 2017). Dimitri Christakis, MD, MPH is the Children and Screens Institute's inaugural Chief Science Officer. He is also the George Adkins Professor at the University of Washington, Editor in Chief of JAMA Pediatrics, and the Chief Health Officer at Special Olympics International. Christakis is a leading expert on how media affects child health and development. He has published over 270 peer reviewed articles (h-index 101) including dozens of media-related studies and co-authored a groundbreaking book, The Elephant in the Living Room: Make Television Work for Your Kids. His work has been featured on Anderson Cooper 360, the Today Show, ABC, NBC, and CBS news as well as all major national newspapers. Christakis received his undergraduate degree at Yale University and his medical training at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine and completed his residency and Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholar Fellowship at the University of Washington School of Medicine. 

In January, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission finalized an updated version of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. And for as much attention as the update may have received, it probably merits more. “It is a big deal. And I think because there's been so much other activity in the news, people haven't really paid attention to it,” Debbie Reynolds, a privacy expert and founder, CEO and chief data privacy officer at Debbie Reynolds Consulting, said on the latest Digiday Podcast episode. The primary reason the COPPA update warrants attention is that it requires companies to receive verifiable parental consent before they can target ads to children. Clear cut as that requirement may appear to be, complying with it may be more complicated. “Part of the confusion around privacy and the challenge companies will have with the update of COPPA is trying to figure out how to do things like how do you get verifiable quote-unquote parental consent beyond just having someone click a button to say, 'Hey, yeah, my parents said, “Yes,“'” said Reynolds. Case in point: Will ad-supported streaming services start asking for parents to share copies of their driver's licenses before their families can sit down to watch a show? And will parents be willing to do that? “Anything that you give to these companies, they're collecting, they're storing. And then that brings up, do I trust this company enough to give them my ID, especially seeing the rash of data breaches,” Reynolds said. “It's just going to be challenging going forward to see how companies really try to handle this issue.”

I recently read through the report on teens and media from the University of California and found some thought-provoking data. The report is titled “Reality Bites: Teens and Screens 2024.” As I was reading through the survey there was one bit of data that caused me to pause, and I want to pass it on to you. This question was asked to the ten to twenty-four year olds who participated in the survey: “At what age did you start using social media?” Now remember that the major social media platforms require users to be at least thirteen years old to create an account. The reason for this is compliance with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. Remember too, that there is growing movement to keep kids off social media until the age of sixteen. So, how did respondents answer the question regarding when they started using social media? Fifty-one- point-five percent, over half, started using social media under the age of thirteen, with many at or under age ten. Parents, what about your kids?

Most people can agree that protecting children from harmful online content — self-harm, disordered eating, gore, disinformation, extreme social pressure — is a good idea. Much of that falls on parents. But algorithms are disturbingly good at showing us extreme content we never searched, but can't look away from. Addiction (and thus more ads) is social media's business model. And keeping up with the Web wormholes that teenagers find themselves in is an impossible task, especially when these platforms are integral to their social lives. In response to the growing mental health crisis among teens (especially girls and young women), the U.S. Senate found bi-partisan support in two bills: COPPA 2.0 — which would expand the scope of 1998's Children's Online Privacy Protection Act to block data collection on minors aged 13-17 — and KOSA (The Kids Online Safety Act), which would turn OFF algorithmic recommendations and auto-play videos, and turn ON maximum privacy settings by default for kids. This seemed like a rare bi-partisan win. But as always, the truth is much more complicated. That's why we've called on Paul Singer to return for his 3rd appearance on the show to explain WTF is going on. Paul is a partner at the law firm Kelley Drye & Warren, where he specializes in consumer protection issues. Previously, he worked in the Texas Attorney General's office, with a particular focus on data protection. He even worked on the very first lawsuit brought through COPPA 1.0's enforcement back in 2000. He breaks down what's in these bills, why they have some good ideas, the fatal flaw that makes KOSA problematic (especially for marginalized communities), and what Congress (and courts) could do instead to protect all citizens from abusive tech platforms. Check out Paul's work here: https://www.kelleydrye.com/people/paul-l-singer And subscribe to his legal blog about these issues and much more: https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access This show is made possible by listener support: https://www.patreon.com/influencepod Join our Discord community! https://discord.gg/influencepod Call the show and leave a message: (347)-871-6548 Email me with guest & trivia suggestions! influencepod69@gmail.com (NOICE) Follow me:

Most agree that children's online privacy is important. But how should it be protected? Ryan Durrie, Associate Director of the Cordell Institute at Washington University in St. Louis, joins Christina Ma and Anora Wang to discuss how the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (or COPPA) protects online privacy today and how it could be reformed. Listen to this episode if you want to learn about the latest policy developments in online privacy. With special guest: Ryan Durrie, Associate Director, Cordell Institute at Washington University in St. Louis Related Links: Cordel Institute for Policy in Law and Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, Comment to FTC on COPPA (Mar. 12, 2024) Neil Richards, Woodrow Hartzog, & Jordan Francis, A Concrete Proposal for Data Loyalty (2023)  Hosted by: Anora Wang, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP and Christina Ma, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz

So far this year, the city of Boston has recorded a grand total of 8 homicides while the similarly populated city of Washington D.C has had 110. Professor Thomas Abt, founding director of the Center for the Study and Practice of Violence Reduction explains what Boston is doing right. Plus, noted nutrition expert, Michael Jacobson reveals his latest project, The National Food Museum, to promote critical thinking about food's impact on health, the environment, farm animal welfare, social equity, global and domestic hunger, and how the food industry and politics affect what we eat.Thomas Abt is the founding director of the Center for the Study and Practice of Violence Reduction (VRC) and an associate research professor in the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Professor Abt is the author of "Bleeding Out: The Devastating Consequences of Urban Violence—and a Bold New Plan for Peace in the Streets" His work is cited in academic journals and featured in major media outlets, both print and video. His TED talk on community violence has been viewed more than 200,000 times.Here's the important thing to remember. It's not just about police, and it can't just be about police… It's also important to have balance… So, while you're engaging these high-risk individuals, these people who are most likely to shoot or be shot, you need to back up those warnings of enforcement with offers of support and services. And that's something that's happening in Boston.Thomas AbtWhen you look at correlations between the restrictiveness of state laws and about how many guns there are, it's about the access to guns. And when access to guns is particularly easy, that's when you have higher rates of violence. Now, in D.C. they have restrictive gun laws, but they're closer to states that have much more permissive laws, particularly in the South. And no city is an island.Thomas AbtWhile you're hearing a lot of fear mongering out there about violent crime. The truth is that we have erased that massive surge that happened during the pandemic. And that's very good news.Thomas AbtMichael Jacobson holds a PhD. in microbiology from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and he co-founded and then led the Center for Science in the Public Interest for four decades. Dr. Jacobson is the author of “Salt Wars: The Battle Over the Biggest Killer in the American Diet.” And he is the founder of the National Food Museum.Some of the exhibits will focus on how healthier diets could improve our health, how better farming techniques could improve the climate. And there's that intersection between climate and health. I thought of making a cow a symbol for the museum. Or maybe an anti-symbol, because meat-eating is a major contributor to disease; and it's a major contributor to climate change and other environmental issues and animal welfare issues, of course. The museum will get into those.Michael JacobsonThere are so many fascinating issues related to food. You know, I think about the history of the human diet, going back to the Stone Age, say 10 or 12 ,000 years ago, and the future of the human diet. It would be wonderful to have an exhibit, showing how diet has changed and may well change in the next 75 years, when many kids just growing up will still be alive.Michael JacobsonAnd in addition to all the wonderful improvements that you're going to exhibit and inform people about once this museum gets underway, you want people to enjoy it and have fun. That's what you've always been about, Mike.Ralph NaderIn Case You Haven't Heard with Franceso DeSantisNews 8/7/241. Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris has chosen Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate. Walz who presided over the passage of an impressive list of progressive priorities in Minnesota, arrayed a broad coalition of Democratic leaders behind his bid for the VP slot, including organized labor, Senator Bernie Sanders, and Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi. His key rival, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, faced increasing scrutiny over his support for anti-public school vouchers, his history of anti-Palestinian racism, and involvement with the shady cover-up in the death of Ellen Greenberg. AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler praised the selection of Walz, writing in a statement “By selecting Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate, Kamala Harris chose a principled fighter and labor champion who will stand up for working people and strengthen this historic ticket.”2. In the UK, the new Labour government continues sending mixed signals on their Middle East policy. Last Friday, the Daily Mail reported the government had implemented a “secret arms boycott,” of Israel, supposedly “freez[ing] applications for new weapons export licences.” Yet on Monday, the Middle East Eye reported that the government has denied this report and maintains that “there has been ‘no change' in its approach to export licences.” The Guardian adds “Although [British] military exports to Israel were only estimated at £18.2m last year, an arms embargo is widely perceived as an appropriate and powerful means to register disapproval of Israel's actions towards the Palestinians.”3. The Canary, a left-wing British new outlet, reports “During the early hours of the morning of Tuesday 6 August, six Palestine Action activists were arrested after they broke inside and damaged weaponry inside the highly secured Bristol manufacturing hub of Israel's largest weapons company, Elbit Systems.” According to this report, the group “used a prison van to smash through the outer perimeter and the roller shutters into the building,” and “Once…inside, they began damaging…machinery and Israeli quadcopter drones.” As the Canary notes, “Elbit System…supplies up to 85% of Israel's military drones and land-based equipment.” Palestine Action issued a statement on this protest, writing “As a party to the Genocide Convention, Britain has a responsibility to prevent the occurrence of genocide. When our government fails to abide by their legal and moral obligations, it's the responsibility of ordinary people to take direct action.”4. Semafor reports “In January, The Wall Street Journal made an explosive claim: Quoting ‘intelligence reports,' the paper reported that not only had 12 members of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, or UNRWA, taken part in the Oct. 7 attack on Israel, but 10% of the relief agency's 12,000 workers in Gaza had ties to militant groups.” Yet, “months later, the paper's top editor overseeing standards privately made an admission: The paper didn't know — and still doesn't know —whether the allegation, based on Israeli intelligence reports, was true.” As Semafor notes, the fact that this story was “based on information [the paper] could not verify is a startling acknowledgment, and calls into question the validity of the claims.” This unconfirmed story resulted in more than a dozen nations – among them the US, the UK, and Germany – freezing their funding for UNRWA, totaling $450 million.5. Federal News Network reports “The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday approved… funding the Defense Department at $852.2 billion, a 3.3% increase over fiscal [year] 2024.” In other words, another year, another $10 billion for the Pentagon. In 2023, the Department of Defense failed its sixth audit in a row, per Reuters.In more positive news, this has been a banner week for consumer protection action at the federal level.6. On August 2nd, the FTC reported “On behalf of the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice sued video-sharing platform TikTok, its parent company ByteDance, as well as its affiliated companies, with flagrantly violating a children's privacy law—the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act—and also alleged they infringed an existing FTC 2019 consent order against TikTok for violating COPPA.” Specifically, “The complaint alleges defendants failed to comply with the COPPA requirement to notify and obtain parental consent before collecting and using personal information from children under the age of 13.” FTC Chair Lina Khan is quoted saying “TikTok knowingly and repeatedly violated kids' privacy, threatening the safety of millions of children across the country…The FTC will continue to use the full scope of its authorities to protect children online—especially as firms deploy increasingly sophisticated digital tools to surveil kids and profit from their data.”7. On August 1st, the Consumer Product Safety Commission ruled that online retail titan Amazon qualifies as a “distributor” and “therefore bears a legal responsibility for recalling dangerous products and informing customers and the public,” per NPR. This report continues to say this decision “stems from a lawsuit filed by the CPSC against Amazon in 2021 over a slew of [unsafe] products offered on the retailer's platform… [including] children's sleepwear that didn't meet federal flammability standards, carbon monoxide detectors that failed to detect carbon monoxide and sound their alarms, and hair dryers that didn't protect against electrocution when immersed in water. Amazon sold more than 418,000 units between 2018 and 2021.” Teresa Murray, consumer watchdog director at U.S. PIRG is quoted saying “This order is about making sure Amazon is just as accountable as every other company that sells products to consumers who often think that if something is for sale, it must be safe.”8. AP reports “Coca-Cola…said Friday it will pay $6 billion in back taxes and interest to the Internal Revenue Service while it appeals a final federal tax court decision in a case dating back 17 years.” This lawsuit began in 2015 and centered around how the beverage giant “calculate[s] U.S. income based on profits amounting to more than $9 billion from foreign licensees and affiliates.” The company has been enjoying increased profitability this quarter, reportedly “boosted by product price increases.”9. “The D.C. attorney general is suing online ticket provider StubHub for allegedly adding surprise fees onto a needlessly long checkout process in violation of local consumer protection laws,” the Washington Post reports. Specifically, this suit alleges “StubHub deceives customers by offering them an incomplete price at first, then making them go through a purchase process that can involve more than 12 pages — with a timer to impart a sense of urgency — and adding extra fees.” The office of Brian Schwalb, the D.C. AG, alleges StubHub has “[extracted] an estimated $118 million in hidden fees,” from District consumers, using “drip pricing” – described by the FTC as “a pricing technique in which firms advertise only part of a product's price and reveal other charges later as the customer goes through the buying process.” This model is illegal under the District's Consumer Protection Procedures Act.10. Finally, “The Justice Department and several dozen state attorneys general won a sweeping victory against Google Monday as a federal judge ruled that the search giant illegally monopolized the online search and advertising markets over the past decade,” per POLITICO. In a lengthy ruling U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google “locked up some 90 percent of the internet search market through a partnership with Apple to be the default search provider in its Safari web browser, alongside similar agreements with handset makers and mobile carriers such Samsung and Verizon. Mehta also found that Google disadvantaged Microsoft in the market for ads displayed next to search results, allowing it to illegally dominate that market as well.” Judge Mehta further stated that “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.” Attorney General Merrick Garland commented “This victory against Google is a historic win for the American people…No company — no matter how large or influential — is above the law. The Justice Department will continue to vigorously enforce our antitrust laws.”This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

TikTok, which says it has 170 million U.S. users, made it too easy for children to create accounts and then collected data on those who did — a major violation of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, known as COPPA, the Justice Department alleged in a lawsuit on Friday. But tech companies collecting and selling data from users goes far beyond TikTok — and affects everyone.Post Reports co-host Martine Powers speaks with technology reporter Drew Harwell about why the Justice Department is suing TikTok for storing the data of millions of children. And she talks with NOTUS investigative reporter Byron Tau, who shares all of the ways that apps gather information on us — and sell that information to law enforcement and governments.Plus, learn how sea lions are mapping the ocean floor with cameras attached to their backs. Check out the video here.Today's show was produced by Emma Talkoff and Trinity Webster-Bass. It was edited by Reena Flores, with help from Arie Plotnick, and mixed by Sean Carter and Rennie Svirnovskiy. Subscribe to The Washington Post here.

Facebook and Instagram parent company Meta is expanding AI offerings across its products, even as the company gets rid of AI features that haven’t quite landed with consumers. The bottom line? CEO Mark Zuckerberg says “Meta AI is on track to be the most used AI assistant in the world by the end of the year.”Then, the Wall Street Journal’s senior personal tech columnist Joanna Stern shares surprises and regrets on her journey as an electric vehicle owner. But first, this week in Congress, the Senate passed the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act, also known as COPPA 2.0, and the Kids Online Safety Act, or KOSA, in a rare bipartisan vote — 91 senators voted in favor, with just three opposing these measures, which aim to reduce harm to kids on the internet.

Facebook and Instagram parent company Meta is expanding AI offerings across its products, even as the company gets rid of AI features that haven’t quite landed with consumers. The bottom line? CEO Mark Zuckerberg says “Meta AI is on track to be the most used AI assistant in the world by the end of the year.”Then, the Wall Street Journal’s senior personal tech columnist Joanna Stern shares surprises and regrets on her journey as an electric vehicle owner. But first, this week in Congress, the Senate passed the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act, also known as COPPA 2.0, and the Kids Online Safety Act, or KOSA, in a rare bipartisan vote — 91 senators voted in favor, with just three opposing these measures, which aim to reduce harm to kids on the internet.

Facebook and Instagram parent company Meta is expanding AI offerings across its products, even as the company gets rid of AI features that haven’t quite landed with consumers. The bottom line? CEO Mark Zuckerberg says “Meta AI is on track to be the most used AI assistant in the world by the end of the year.”Then, the Wall Street Journal’s senior personal tech columnist Joanna Stern shares surprises and regrets on her journey as an electric vehicle owner. But first, this week in Congress, the Senate passed the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act, also known as COPPA 2.0, and the Kids Online Safety Act, or KOSA, in a rare bipartisan vote — 91 senators voted in favor, with just three opposing these measures, which aim to reduce harm to kids on the internet.

On Tuesday, the US Senate passed the Kids Online Safety Act and the Children and Teens' Online Privacy Protection Act with an overwhelming majority, advancing the package to the House, where their future remains uncertain. In this week's episode of Top in Tech, Conan D'Arcy and Ugonma Nwankwo discuss the significance of these bills, the challenges they face in passing the House, and the potential state of US child online safety and privacy in 2025 if the bills do not pass. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Secret Service's acting director admitted failures and promised changes. Senators pressed him and the FBI deputy director at a hearing to examine the assassination attempt of former President Donald Trump.The Israeli military said it killed a senior commander of the Hezbollah terrorist group in Lebanon's capital city Beirut. The military said this was a retaliatory airstrike targeting the man responsible for the killing of 12 Israeli children in Golan Heights over the weekend.President Joe Biden called Brazil's president, Lula da Silva, to talk about the election results in Venezuela. The United States says possible fraud might have taken place, as protests challenging the country's socialist regime grow.The Senate passed two major online child safety bills in a nearly unanimous vote. The Children and Teens' Online Privacy Protection Act would ban targeted advertising to minors and data collection without their consent. And the Kids Online Safety Act would make explicit a "duty of care" that social media companies have when it comes to minors using their products.

We haven't seen significant legislation to protect kids online for the last quarter of a century, this bill could change that.  On today's podcast we're talking about Senate Bill 1409, "Kids Online Safety Act" (KOSA) which, if passed, would be among the most significant kids' online safety statutes since the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 2000. Upon its passage, this bill would allow parents to sue social media companies and other online platforms if they do not sufficiently shield children under the age of 13 from harmful content on their platforms. We'll discuss what else this bill entails, what the opposition says, and what you can do to support its passage. Project Liberty Action: See their template for contacting your representative Our Sources: The Cap Times, Congress.gov, NBC, NCOSE, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, Wikipedia, The Verge, TechCrunch.com #onlinesafety #KOSA #podcast #generationalpha #parents #caregivers #legislation  

Rebecca Newton is a legend of the online community profession. After 30 years, she has retired. But what does it mean when we retire from this work? Her career began AOL in 1994, building communities and managing a massive volunteer program. Among her numerous stops, Rebecca found a focus in child safety, leading such efforts for Sulake (the company behind Habbo Hotels and Disney's Virtual Magic Kingdom), Mind Candy (Moshi Monsters), and most recently SuperAwesome, a provider of tools for safer, responsible digital engagement with young people, who was acquired by Epic Games. A program manager for community in 1997, a community director in 2001, a chief community officer in 2007: Rebecca has held all of the titles. Along the way, she has paved a path for the community profession, pushing us higher in corporate environments and creating valuable resources for us. Most notably, her 24 year stewardship of the e-mint listserv for community pros, an iconic resource that has helped countless community facilitators. After such a career, what's it like to step away from full-time work? What goes through the mind of a retiring community pro? That's what we'll discuss, plus: How do you prepare for retirement, as a community pro? What will Rebecca miss? What won't she miss? The least and most effective pieces of legislation passed during Rebecca's career Big Quotes What will Rebecca miss most about being a full-time community pro? (17:32): “I'm going to miss working with people online the most. It's a different animal than working with people offline, and I did plenty of that before I started in the online world. … Everybody thought they invented remote working. I've had remote teams since 1994, so it's not new. I'm going to really miss that because there's a special culture in the online world, as you know, that is really hard to describe, or it's hard for me to describe but is not like the offline world. It's like being in a special club, in a secret club. That's how it feels to me.” -Rebecca Newton What won't she miss? (23:07): “I won't miss … people naively thinking they know better than everybody who built the widget. I've heard the conversations. ‘Oh, they can't let go. They don't know how to let go. They don't know how to grow. They don't know how to do this.' Then I would think, ‘Okay, well, we'll see who's not growing in a year, so I'm going to go looking for another job because I know in a year this thing's not going to exist.'” -Rebecca Newton The cyclical trend of online community obsession (31:09): “I remember in 2000 when dentists were [asking], ‘Do I need an online community?' There was a trend of, “Oh, it's online community,' because of the success at AOL. I was like, ‘No. You're a dentist.'” -Rebecca Newton Overreaction from government officials who aren't active online (34:21): “I'm not saying anything about how smart [government decision makers] are, about how great their intentions were, or their abilities in the world. [But] if you're not [active online], if you're not a heavy user, if you're not in the kid's world using it, how can you possibly [make good decisions]? That's what we see in Great Britain, in the EU. Something happens to one person under 16, they want to have 27 laws about it. Because this thing happened.” -Rebecca Newton Kids want to collaborate, they want a job (38:40): “That's the biggest thing I learned about working with kids. The very first thing when they get online or game in an app, whatever it is, [they say] ‘I want a job. Can I have a job? Let's do this together. Let's do that together.'” -Rebecca Newton When legislation goes too far (39:18): “Over-regulation is detrimental. I think all it does is create a whole lot of jobs for people to do a lot of stuff that nobody's ever going to look at. That's a really rude thing for me to say, but I believe that.” -Rebecca Newton About Rebecca Newton Rebecca Newton has spent 30 years in the commercial internet industry. As head of digital trust and community, Rebecca led online community, online safety, moderation, engagement, and customer services efforts at SuperAwesome (of Epic Games) from 2015 to 2023. Prior to joining SuperAwesome, Rebecca worked at Mind Candy as the chief community & safety officer, serving over 140 million registered (young) users. From 2001 to 2007, she worked at Sulake (the company behind Habbo Hotels) as the global director of community for the world's largest teen virtual world site, spanning 24 countries. She began her online community career with America Online in 1994, where she wore many hats, and finally landed as the program manager for AOL's community leader program. Among her contributions to the discipline of online community, Rebecca co-founded VirComm, the London-based annual conference for online community professionals in 2011, and the e-mint community management listserv. She serves on boards and committees for numerous organizations, including AgeCheq, the Archewell Foundation, and DitchTheLabel.org. Related Links Rebecca's previous appearance on Community Signal Rebecca's website e-mint, a community management listserv that Rebecca has managed since 2000 AgeCheq, the Archewell Foundation, and DitchTheLabel.org, organizations that Rebecca provides guidance to eWorld, an Apple service that launched in 1994 and provided a community feature Michael Acton Smith, who was once Rebecca's boss The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, the Communications Decency Act, and Section 230, which were all pieces of legislation passed during Rebecca's career Virtual Magic Kingdom, an online game created by Disney and Sulake, where Rebecca led community and safety efforts Jenna Woodul, potentially the first person with the chief community officer title Jenna Woodul on Community Signal MIT's Scratch community, which is managed by someone that Rebecca has mentored, who was initially a member of one of the communities she was responsible for Transcript View transcript on our website Your Thoughts If you have any thoughts on this episode that you'd like to share, please leave me a comment or send me an email. Thank you for listening.

On this day in legal history, December 1, 1955, Rosa Parks, a 42-year-old African American woman, sparked an inflection point in the American Civil Rights Movement. Working as a seamstress at the Montgomery Fair department store, Parks was returning home on a city bus during rush hour in Montgomery, Alabama. The buses had a segregated seating policy, reserving the front 10 seats for white passengers. Parks sat in the first row behind these reserved seats. As the bus became crowded, the driver, James Blake, ordered Parks and three other African American passengers to vacate their seats for white passengers. While the others complied, Parks refused, maintaining that she was not in a seat reserved for whites. Defying the driver's order, she was arrested for violating a city law enforcing racial segregation on public buses.This act of nonviolent resistance by Parks, who was already actively involved with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) as a secretary to E.D. Nixon, the president of its Montgomery chapter, became a catalyst for change. Her arrest and the subsequent events highlighted the injustices of Jim Crow laws, prevalent across the South, which enforced discrimination and segregation against African Americans.Following her arrest, Parks was booked, fingerprinted, and briefly incarcerated. Charged with "refusing to obey orders of bus driver," she faced significant physical risk while in police custody, causing great concern for her family. Despite not being the first to be prosecuted for violating Montgomery's bus segregation laws, Parks' impeccable character and high esteem in her community made her case a rallying point. This led to the Montgomery Bus Boycott, a well-orchestrated, peaceful protest lasting 381 days. The boycott saw the rise of Martin Luther King, Jr., then a 26-year-old minister, who gained national fame for his eloquent oratory promoting civil rights and nonviolent protest.Parks was fined $10, plus $4 in court fees for her act of defiance. Her arrest record from December 1, 1955, shows her seated in the non-reserved section, challenging the segregation laws not by occupying a white-only seat, but by refusing to relocate when asked.Her conviction led to an appeal process entangled in the state court system. Meanwhile, in a related case, Browder v. Gayle, a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court ruled on June 4, 1956, that racial segregation on public buses was unconstitutional. This decision was later upheld by the United States Supreme Court on November 13, 1956, effectively ending bus segregation and signaling a significant legal victory for the Civil Rights Movement. Rosa Parks, through her quiet yet profound act of resistance, earned the title of "Mother of the Civil Rights Movement," symbolizing the fight against racial injustice in America.U.S. Representative George Santos (R-NY), currently facing a House expulsion vote, has been embroiled in controversy since his 2022 election. Accused of fabricating significant parts of his biography, including false claims of attending New York University, working at Goldman Sachs, and Citigroup, and even falsely claiming Jewish heritage with grandparents fleeing Nazis during World War Two, Santos faces serious allegations. He has been indicted on charges of laundering campaign funds and defrauding donors, although he pleads not guilty. Despite surviving a previous expulsion attempt, Santos' situation worsened following a bipartisan investigation revealing misuse of campaign funds for personal expenses, including spa treatments and luxury retail shopping. With the House requiring a two-thirds majority for expulsion, the decision rests on a significant number of Republicans joining all Democrats. Santos, who has refused to resign but will not run for reelection, could be the first member expelled from the House without a criminal conviction or affiliation with the Confederacy. If expelled, New York Governor Kathy Hochul will call a special election for his seat.US lawmaker George Santos, indicted on fraud charges, faces House expulsion voteA U.S. District Judge, Donald Molloy, blocked Montana's ban on the short-video sharing app TikTok, which was set to take effect on January 1. The judge ruled that the ban violated the free speech rights of users and overstepped state power, labeling it as unconstitutional. TikTok, owned by China's ByteDance, had sued Montana to prevent the ban, asserting that it infringed upon the First Amendment rights of both the company and its users. Montana users of TikTok had also filed a lawsuit against the state legislature-approved ban, which was grounded in concerns over personal data security and potential Chinese espionage.TikTok expressed satisfaction with the ruling, emphasizing the platform's importance for self-expression, earning a living, and community building for Montanans. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, who defended the ban, noted that the ruling was preliminary and the legal analysis might evolve as the case progresses. Knudsen's office is considering further actions to defend the law, which they argue protects Montanans from the misuse of their data by the Chinese Communist Party.In previous court filings, TikTok has consistently denied sharing U.S. user data with the Chinese government and highlighted its substantial measures to safeguard user privacy and security. Judge Molloy, appointed by President Bill Clinton, found TikTok's arguments persuasive and noted an anti-Chinese sentiment underlying Montana's legal stance and legislation.The blocked state law could have imposed fines of $10,000 for each TikTok violation in Montana but did not penalize individual users. Molloy criticized Montana's attempt to exercise foreign policy authority, a domain reserved for the federal government, and deemed the state's action as excessively broad. While many states and the U.S. government have restricted TikTok on government devices, Montana's attempt to completely ban the app's use was unique. Efforts to nationally ban TikTok or restrict foreign-owned apps have been proposed in Congress but have not progressed. This decision follows a trend of courts blocking similar bans, including former President Donald Trump's 2020 attempt to bar new downloads of TikTok and WeChat.US judge blocks Montana from banning TikTok use in state | ReutersTikTok Ban in Montana Blocked by Court as Free Speech Threat (2)Google has urged the UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to take action against Microsoft, alleging that Microsoft's business practices are disadvantaging competitors in the cloud computing market. This follows a broader scrutiny by regulators in the UK, EU, and US of the cloud computing industry, particularly focusing on the market dominance of Microsoft and Amazon. In 2022, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Microsoft's Azure controlled a substantial 70-80% of the UK's public cloud infrastructure services market, with Google's cloud division trailing at 5-10%.Google's primary concern, as expressed in a letter to the CMA, is Microsoft's licensing practices. These practices, according to Google, effectively compel customers to choose Azure as their primary cloud services provider, hindering competition and harming customers. Microsoft, in response, stated that it had updated its licensing rules to address these concerns and promote competition, although these changes have not appeased rivals.Microsoft spokesperson highlighted that the competition between cloud hyperscalers remains healthy and that independent data shows both Microsoft and Google gaining ground on AWS. Google Cloud Vice President Amit Zavery criticized Microsoft's approach to cloud services, emphasizing Google's commitment to a multi-cloud strategy that allows customers flexibility in choosing providers. He pointed out that Microsoft's licensing terms effectively increase costs for customers using cloud services from Google or AWS instead of Azure.Zavery also differentiated Microsoft's market behavior from that of AWS, noting that AWS customers don't face similar restrictive practices. Google's recommendations to the CMA include compelling Microsoft to improve interoperability and banning it from withholding security updates to customers who switch providers. The CMA has yet to comment on Google's allegations and recommendations.Exclusive: Google pushes for antitrust action against Microsoft in UK cloud market | ReutersMeta Platforms Inc. has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), challenging the constitutionality of the agency's structure and its authority. This legal action seeks an immediate halt to the FTC's efforts to modify their 2020 privacy settlement, claiming the agency's in-house process violates the U.S. Constitution. The central argument of Meta's complaint is that the FTC's administrative process is unfairly biased in favor of its commissioners, contrasting with the impartiality expected in an independent court's proceedings.This lawsuit is the latest in a series of corporate challenges to federal agencies' enforcement actions, particularly after the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Axon Enterprise v. FTC and SEC v. Cochran, which allows FTC and Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement targets to contest the constitutionality of agency actions without awaiting an administrative law judge's decision. Meta's contention centers on the argument that the FTC's structure does not conform with due process standards.The case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, follows a broader trend of scrutinizing administrative agency power at the Supreme Court level. This scrutiny includes cases like SEC v. Jarkesy, West Virginia v. EPA, and Seila Law LLC v. CFPB, which question the extent of agency powers and their constitutional validity. A ruling against the FTC could have significant implications, potentially curtailing the agency's consumer protection and privacy enforcement capabilities.Privacy advocates and legislators have criticized Meta's lawsuit as an attempt to evade accountability, particularly concerning the company's handling of children's data and online safety. The lawsuit could also slow down the FTC's proposed updates to the agreement with Meta, which includes limiting facial recognition use and banning profit from children's data, potentially impacting Meta's business model. Sen. Edward Markey, author of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, condemned Meta's legal action, seeing it as a move to avoid scrutiny.Meta Lawsuit a ‘Serious Attack' on FTC Enforcement AuthorityThe U.S. Supreme Court is set to review a $6 billion settlement involving Purdue Pharma LP and its owners, the Sackler family, which may significantly impact the conduct of bankruptcy settlements in the U.S. The settlement, intended to protect the Sacklers from future opioid lawsuits, utilizes a legal mechanism that grants immunity to third parties like the Sackler family, who are not directly bankrupt but are connected to the bankruptcy case. This mechanism has been used in various cases, including mass litigation over dangerous products and sex abuse claims against organizations like Catholic dioceses and the Boy Scouts of America. However, its legality is now under question.Critics of the settlement argue that it unfairly strips victims of their right to a jury trial and extends beyond the powers granted to bankruptcy courts by Congress. On the other hand, industry groups and some bankruptcy scholars argue that such deals are necessary for fair and efficient distribution of a bankrupt company's limited assets. The central issue in the case is whether provisions called non-consensual third-party releases, which are a key part of these agreements, are lawful.By way of very brief background, in bankruptcy law, a non-consensual third-party release is a controversial and complex provision often included in reorganization plans. This release discharges certain non-debtor parties, typically corporate affiliates, officers, or directors, from liabilities related to the debtor's obligations, without the explicit consent of the affected creditors. These releases are designed to facilitate the restructuring process by protecting key stakeholders who might otherwise face legal action. However, they are contentious as they can potentially infringe upon creditors' rights to seek full redress from parties other than the debtor. The legality and enforceability of such releases vary significantly across jurisdictions, reflecting differing views on balancing debtor relief with creditor rights.The Biden administration's Solicitor General, Elizabeth Prelogar, has suggested that if the Sacklers are forced back into the civil justice system, they could end up paying more than the $6 billion currently offered. The settlement has also been criticized for potentially leaving the Sackler family wealthier after all payments are made. The Sackler family, however, disputes allegations of wrongdoing and asserts that the settlement avoids prolonged and uncertain civil litigation.This case also encompasses a related proposal to transform Purdue into a public benefit corporation focused on developing and distributing medications for overdose reversal and opioid addiction treatment. Members of the Sackler family have not faced criminal charges, although they agreed to a $225 million settlement with the Justice Department in 2020 for civil claims, while Purdue pleaded guilty to federal felonies related to OxyContin marketing. The outcome of the Supreme Court's review could have broad implications for future bankruptcy settlements and the rights of victims in similar cases.A $6 Billion Settlement Threatens to Upend US Bankruptcy Deals Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

CTL Script/ Top Stories of October 28th    Publish Date: October 27th Henssler :15  From the Ingles Studio Welcome to the Award-Winning Cherokee Tribune Ledger Podcast  Today is Saturday, October 28th and Happy 55th Birthday to Julia Roberts I'm Keith Ippolito and here are the stories Cherokee is talking about, presented by Credit Union of Georgia.  Alpharetta Woman Charged After Fatal Crash Senate Panel Hears Tragic Stories From Georgia's Foster Care System Northside Hospital Cherokee's Katie Pearson Named Outstanding Woman in Healthcare Plus, a conversation with celebrity chef Brian Duffy from the Food Network on the red white and blue BBQ competition. We'll have all this and more coming up on the Cherokee Tribune-Ledger Podcast, and if you're looking for Community news, we encourage you to listen and subscribe!  Commercial: CU of GA – ESOG  STORY 1: Alpharetta Woman Charged After Fatal Crash Hailey Williamson, a 20-year-old woman from Alpharetta, has been arrested in connection with a crash that resulted in the death of a motorcycle rider. She is charged with second-degree vehicular homicide and failure to yield right of way. The charges are misdemeanors. According to an arrest warrant filed by the Holly Springs Police Department, the crash occurred when Williamson illegally turned left from Sixes Road eastbound, failing to yield to traffic, and collided with a motorcycle. The motorcycle rider, Lester Berry, aged 63, from Holly Springs, sustained fatal injuries in the collision. Williamson was arrested and booked into the Cherokee County jail, but she was released on a $2,211 bond the following day. STORY 2: U.S. Senate Panel Hears Tragic Stories From Georgia's Foster Care System A U.S. Senate subcommittee, chaired by Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia, is conducting a bipartisan investigation into the treatment of foster children in the United States, including a review of audits by the Georgia Division of Family & Children Services (DFCS). The investigation revealed that DFCS failed to address risks and safety concerns in 84% of cases brought to its attention. The subcommittee heard testimony from a mother, Rachel Aldridge, whose two-year-old daughter, Brooklyn, died in foster care. Another witness, Mon'a Houston, shared her five-year experience in foster care, detailing overmedication, restraints, and isolation. Expert witnesses emphasized that these failures are systemic and not due to individual caseworkers. Sen. Ossoff stressed the need for long-overdue reforms to protect vulnerable children. STORY 3: Northside Hospital Cherokee's Katie Pearson Named Outstanding Woman in Healthcare Katie Pearson, the Director of Operations at Northside Hospital Cherokee, was honored with the Outstanding Woman in Healthcare Award for 2023 by the Georgia Alliance of Community Hospitals. Pearson's transformative work on behalf of Northside Hospital Cherokee and its patients, including enhancing the continuum of care with local senior care facilities, developing a Transitional Care Clinic, and leading the Sports Medicine Program, contributed to her recognition. She has also been active in various community positions, emphasizing her commitment to improving the quality of life for residents in Cherokee County and surrounding communities. The award was presented at GACH's 40th Annual Conference on October 12, 2023. We have opportunities for sponsors to get great engagement on these shows. Call 770.874.3200 for more info.  Back in a moment  Break: DRAKE – ELON – THE MARKET STORY 4: Georgia, 32 Other States Going After Meta in Federal Court Georgia has joined a coalition of 33 states in filing a federal lawsuit against Meta (formerly Facebook), accusing the social media company of knowingly designing and deploying features that addict children and teens. The lawsuit alleges that Meta's practices violate state consumer protection laws and the federal Children's Online Privacy Protection Act and have contributed to a youth mental health crisis. Based on testimony from former Meta employees, the complaint claims the platforms' algorithms push users into harmful behavior. The lawsuit seeks injunctive and monetary relief to address the harms caused by the platforms. Meta expressed disappointment in the states for taking them to court and noted their commitment to providing safe online experiences for teens. STORY 5: Cherokee County Elections Office Honors Poll Workers Cherokee County in Georgia recognized the invaluable service of poll workers in a poll worker appreciation event on October 12th. Anne Dover, the Director of Cherokee County Elections and Voter Registration, emphasized the crucial role of poll workers as the backbone of the election system. Poll workers play a pivotal role in facilitating the voting process, ensuring elections are conducted according to laws, and offering citizens the opportunity to exercise their voting rights. The county is expected to employ between 500 to 600 poll workers for the 2024 election cycle, making it an essential part of the democratic process. Those interested in becoming a poll worker can contact Grace Waddell, the training and education manager at Cherokee County Elections and Registration. Commercial: HELLER LAW – CHEROKEE CHAMBER – POWERS - AMERICAN LEGION  STORY 7: BRIAN DUFFY And now here is celebrity chef Brian Duffy from the food market on the red white and blue bbq competition. STORY 8: BRIAN DUFFY ***INTERVIEW** We'll have closing comments after this.  COMMERCIAL: DAYCO – INGLES 9 – Henssler 60  SIGN OFF –   Thanks again for listening to today's Cherokee Tribune Ledger podcast. . If you enjoy these shows, we encourage you to check out our other offerings, like the Marietta Daily Journal Podcast, the Gwinnett Daily Post, the Community Podcast for Rockdale Newton and Morgan Counties, or the Paulding County News Podcast. Get more on these stories and other great content at tribune ledger news.com. Giving you important information about our community and telling great stories are what we do.   Did you know over 50% of Americans listen to podcasts weekly? Make sure you join us for our next episode and be sure to share this podcast on social media with your friends and family. Add us to your Alexa Flash Briefing or your Google Home Briefing and be sure to like, follow, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.  www.henssler.com  www.ingles-markets.com  www.esogrepair.com  www.daycosystems.com  www.powerselectricga.com  www.elonsalon.com  www.jeffhellerlaw.com  www.drakerealty.com www.cherokeechamber.com Cumming Fair  #NewsPodcast #CurrentEvents #TopHeadlines #BreakingNews #PodcastDiscussion #PodcastNews #InDepthAnalysis #NewsAnalysis #PodcastTrending #WorldNews #LocalNews #GlobalNews #PodcastInsights #NewsBrief #PodcastUpdate #NewsRoundup #WeeklyNews #DailyNews #PodcastInterviews #HotTopics #PodcastOpinions #InvestigativeJournalism #BehindTheHeadlines #PodcastMedia #NewsStories #PodcastReports #JournalismMatters #PodcastPerspectives #NewsCommentary #PodcastListeners #NewsPodcastCommunity #NewsSource #PodcastCuration #WorldAffairs #PodcastUpdates #AudioNews #PodcastJournalism #EmergingStories #NewsFlash #PodcastConversations See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Blog: https://medium.com/asecuritysite-when-bob-met-alice/did-you-buy-a-ring-doorbell-from-2015-to-2019-then-you-could-get-compensation-c8434916b2da  I know the title sounds like one of those adverts that say, “Did you buy a car between 1890 and 2023, then you can get compensation, because they didn't tell you that you needed to put fuel in your car! In fact, you don't even have to have bought a car or bought anything; you just have to show that you are still breathing, and you might still also get it. Call us now! Before COVID-19, I used to demonstrate live at conferences the Ring doorbell and showcase weak practices. The video wasn't encrypted at all, and where I could easily view it. Along with this, user credentials were left unencrypted. But, after we went into lockdown, it was not so easy to give practical demonstrations, so I've not done a demo for a few years. But you will be glad to know that I'm all set up for hacks on electrical sockets, doorbells, kettles, door locks, and many other things, so if your company wants a demo, please get in contact. Overall, I have found that for the balance between useability/ease of setup, and security, most companies go for useability/ease of setup, as they know their users are often not that technical. Now, it has been shown that there are thousands of customers of the Ring doorbell that have been affected by cyberattacks. For this, Amazon will have to pay out $5.8 million in payments to around 55,000 customers for its weak data security practices. For this, it has been well known that some employees at Amazon had been spying on user videos: It was also found that there was no encryption on the video streams and that credentials were sent in a plaintext format. There were also attacks on previously breached passwords or in using repeated attempts at guessing credentials. Normally, this type of practice would be defended with a lock-out policy or by monitoring password usage, and which was weakly implemented. The case was brought by the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) in a federal court [here]: It is thought that 1,250 devices were breached with passwords, that the live stream was compromised, and that there were at least 20 cases that involved a breach of over one month. The suit outlines cases involving screaming obscenities, demanding ransoms, and threatening murder and sexual assault [here], and covers those who bought Ring doorbells between 2015 and 2019 — even if they have not been hacked. These will be used to pay for refunds for the doorbell and requires that Amazon delete all the video information gathered and any user credentials. Amazon will also have to inform the FTC about future incidents. Along with this, the FTC reported that Amazon failed to encrypt video streams from 2016 and 2020, along with no encryption for user credentials and details, and failed to get user consent for the viewing of video streams. Also, they failed to provide adequate training for their staff in supporting the Ring doorbell. In 2021, though, Amazon finally implemented encryption and proactive monitoring on the product [here]: Alongside this, Amazon will also have to pay $25 million for Alexa with the FTC Act and Children's Online Privacy Protection Act by retaining children's information without parental permission. Amazon will also be required to stop using geolocation, voice information, and children's voice information for any product improvement purposes. Conclusions When ease of use and usability are placed before cybersecurity, there's likely to be a storm brewing. I like Apple devices, as they seem to be able to span both sides of this. My demos for Ring, though, don't work anymore, but I've got many other things to showcase. Overall, one bad product implementation can taint a whole brand. Amazon needs to watch that its Ring doorbell doesn't give the company a bad name, as it has its e-commerce and cloud infrastructure to look after.

As most privacy watchers know, one of the hot-button issues in the ongoing debate over federal legislation is whether the law should include a private right of action (PRA). As we also know, some existing federal privacy laws include a PRA (e.g., the Cable Communications Policy Act) and some don't (e.g., the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act). https://www.adlawaccess.com/2023/06/articles/jones-v-google-reminds-us-that-private-rights-of-action-could-come-from-anywhere/ Jessica Rich jrich@kelleydrye.com (202) 342-8580 https://www.kelleydrye.com/Our-People/Jessica-L-Rich Subscribe to the Ad Law Access blog - www.adlawaccess.com/subscribe/ Subscribe to the Ad Law News Newsletter - https://www.kelleydrye.com/News-Events/Publications/Newsletters/Ad-Law-News-and-Views?dlg=1 View the Advertising and Privacy Law Resource Center - https://www.kelleydrye.com/Advertising-and-Privacy-Law-Resource-Center Find all of our links here linktr.ee/KelleyDryeAdLaw Hosted by Simone Roach

The 8bA Podcast is a podcast bringing you the latest and greatest geeky news of the past week. NEWS ITEMS Captain America 4. Marvel announced that the film will be retitled “Brave New World.” Critical Role. Critical Role's joint collaboration of a Zelda one-shot with Nintendo is available on YouTube. The adventure features Liam O'Brien, Emily Axford, Omar Najam, Robbie Daymond, Marisha Ray, and Matthew Mercer as GM. The adventure uses a Powered by the Apocalypse hack co-developed with Nintendo Treehouse. Diablo 4. Much anticipated Blizzard ARPG has finally released on PC, PS5, and Xbox. The first player to reach Hardcore level 100 had their character perma-killed due to a disconnect form the server - Blizzard, as an anti-cheat measure, kills your character when you DC. Everybody 1-2-Switch. A sequel to the glorified tech demo Switch launch title has been announced, releasing June 30th. It will feature similar wacky gameplay as the original. Microsoft. The Xbox maker will pay $20M in fines after settling with the FTC after it was found to be illegally collecting data from children on Xbox. COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) stipulates that online service providers must notify parents of their intentions and seek consent before they can collect and use personal information from children under 13. Microsoft maintains that the data was never used, shared, or monetized, and that the procedures that led to the collection and retention of such data has been updated in compliance. Pastel Joycons. Nintendo announced two new pastel Joycon sets that will release June 30th. The sets are dual-colored, with a purple and green set and a pink and yellow set. They will retail for $80. Spider-Man 4. Tom Holland confirmed with Variety that talks about the film had officially begun, but they've halted the process in solidarity with the ongoing writers' strike. The One Ring. Public bid announcements have started for the soon-to-be-released 1/1 printing of The One Ring from the upcoming Magic: the Gathering x Lords of the Rings crossover set. This particular printing is foil, full art, and written in Elvish. Based on a video upload from WotC, the card is already starting to curl. Witcher. Doug Cockle, voice actor for Geralt in The Witcher games, revealed that he is being treated for prostate cancer. He says treatment is going well, and encourages men over 50 to get a PSA test. LINKS Website: https://8-bitadventures.com Patreon: https://patreon.com/8bitAdventures Merch: https://8-bitadventures.com/shop Join the Discord: https://discord.gg/FAPKjjQ “1-UP” is by Professor Shyguy. You can find his work at https://professorshyguy.bandcamp.com

Bill & Mike Got Your Wednesday Jumping With Guardians Bullpen Blows It Again...Lose To Red Sox 5-4-Guards-PBP Tom Hamilton - PGA Tour And LIV Golf Announce Merger-NBC Radio Rory O'Neill - Live Nation Concert Update-Barry Gabel-LN - Ohio Abortion Rule-August election and the 60% issue-Michael Gonidakis-Ohio Right To Life - Republicans in Congress are planning to hold FBI Director Christopher Wray in contempt of Congress for withholding information about an investigation into Joe Biden during the time when he was Vice President. White House Correspondent Jon Decker - Microsoft is going to have to pay a big fine for collecting personal information from minors without their parent's consent. What is “The Child's Online Privacy Protection Act,” and what can you do to protect your kid's from releasing private information over the internet-NBC Radio Erin Real

Microsoft is going to have to pay a big fine for collecting personal information from minors without their parent's consent. What is “The Child's Online Privacy Protection Act,” and what can you do to protect your kid's from releasing private information over the internet. National Correspondent Erin Real joins JT to explain.

Richard Chapo (“chap-oh”), a lawyer for 24 plus years, is a well-known Internet business lawyer in Southern California. Richard's philosophy is to proactively position his clients to minimize their potential exposure to lawsuits. He provides advice to clients as large as multinational corporations and as small as hobby bloggers with an eye towards eliminating potential problems areas before lawsuits are filed. Richard is versed in a variety of Internet laws including the DMCA, Communications Decency Act, and Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, as well as FTC compliance guidelines, state privacy mandates, and recurring billing laws. Richard Chapo Vroom Veer Stories Worked as a lawyer in starting in 1992, working 70-hour weeks; got burnt out Spent a year in Siberia drinking beer and vodka working 3 hours a day Started working in Internet law in the early 2000's when it was the wild west New privacy laws in Europe are going in effect in May 2018; huge compliance issue Asia business compliance not so much of an issue for most small businesses How privacy in the US is mostly a joke; we have an "opt out" culture Europe is more of an "Opt in" culture vs "Opt out" in the US Did you know; people can't post baby pics on FB in the EU Richard Chapo Links Richard's Website Facebook Twitter LinkedIn

Stai ascoltando un estratto gratuito di Ninja PRO, la selezione quotidiana di notizie per i professionisti del digital business. Con Ninja PRO puoi avere ogni giorno marketing insight, social media update, tech news, business events e una selezione di articoli di approfondimento dagli esperti della Redazione Ninja. Vai su www.ninja.it/ninjapro per abbonarti al servizio.USA, social media vietati ai minori di 13 anni. Si tratta della proposta di legge bipartisan presentata al Senato americano, secondo la quale i minori di 13 anni dovrebbero essere banditi dai social e quelli tra i 13 e i 17 avrebbero bisogno del consenso dei genitori per creare un account. Il Children's Online Privacy Protection Act parte dalla considerazione degli effetti negativi dei social media sui minori, pur non considerando che la maggior parte delle piattaforme già proibiscono l'uso agli under-13. Secondo i gruppi per le libertà civili le eccessive proposte di legge sul tema potrebbero causare più danni che benefici. Amazon concederà in licenza serie originali e film ad altre società media. Il lancio della nuova unit Amazon MGM Studios Distribution, consentirà all'azienda di offrire Amazon Originals e altri titoli a società terze, che potrebbero includere servizi di streaming (gratuiti, ad-supported o in abbonamento). Sebbene la società abbia già distribuito spettacoli in passato, questa nuova iniziativa sarà su scala molto più ampia. Twitter elimina i vecchi account per liberare nomi utente. Secondo i recenti tweet di Elon Musk, il social sta eliminando gli account inattivi sulla sua piattaforma, rendendo così di nuovo disponibili un certo numero di nomi utente a lungo ambiti. Twitter ha già una politica sugli account inattivi che suggerisce agli utenti di effettuare il login almeno ogni 30 giorni per evitare che gli account vengano rimossi in modo permanente, ma non aveva mai fatto alcuno sforzo su larga scala finora.

Meta is monetizing kids as much as they are the rest of us. But this week the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has alleged that Meta has violated a 2020 order to protect kids on the site, as well as running afoul of the agency's Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. The FTC will not just be doling out another financial slap on the wrist, they're moving to completely prohibit Meta from monetizing children at all. This is the TechCrunch Podcast where we talk about the top stories in tech with the people who cover them. This week, Darrell is joined by TechCrunch reporter Devin Coldewey to talk about if Meta's cavalier approach to compliance will finally be coming to a close.Articles from the episode:FTC moves to completely prohibit Meta from monetizing kidsAI can't replace human writersHackers are increasingly using ChatGPT lures to spread malware on FacebookStripe, a longtime partner of Lyft, signs a big deal with UberMicrosoft launches Pegasus program for startups, awarding up to $350,000 in creditsThe TechCrunch Podcast posts every Friday. Subscribe on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts to be alerted when new episode drop. Check out the other TechCrunch podcasts: Equity, Found, and Chain Reaction.

On this episode of the Burr Cybersecurity & Data Privacy Podcast, Burr Partner and Team Leader India Vincent, CIPP/US focuses on the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA. While there are probably many of you who view COPPA as old news in light of the various new consumer privacy laws that have popped up in the past few years, it is important not to lose sight of the specific requirements that protect private information of children under the age of 13.This series is designed to provide a high-level overview of what businesses and industry professionals need to know about cybersecurity and data privacy issues. We cover topics, trends, and developments while also discussing the fundamentals of the law.

This week's Cyberlaw Podcast covers efforts to pull the Supreme Court into litigation over the Texas law treating social media platforms like common carriers and prohibiting them from discriminating based on viewpoint when they take posts down. I predict that the court won't overturn the appellate decision staying an unpersuasive district court opinion. Mark MacCarthy and I both think that the transparency requirements in the Texas law are defensible, but Mark questions whether viewpoint neutrality is sufficiently precise for a law that trenches on the platforms' free speech rights. I talk about a story that probably tells us more about content moderation in real life than ten Supreme Court amicus briefs—the tale of an OnlyFans performer who got her Instagram account restored by using alternative dispute resolution on Instagram staff: “We met up and like I f***ed a couple of them and I was able to get my account back like two or three times,” she said.  Meanwhile, Jane Bambauer unpacks the Justice Department's new policy for charging cases under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. It's a generally sensible extension of some positions the department has taken in the Supreme Court, including refusing to prosecute good faith security research or to allow companies to create felonies by writing use restrictions into their terms of service. Unless they also write those restrictions into cease and desist letters, I point out. Weirdly, the Justice Department will treat violations of such letters as potential felonies.  Mark gives a rundown of the new, Democrat-dominated Federal Trade Commission's first policy announcement—a surprisingly uncontroversial warning that the commission will pursue educational tech companies for violations of the Children's' Online Privacy Protection Act.  Maury Shenk explains the recent United Kingdom Attorney General speech on international law and cyber conflict.  Mark celebrates the demise of Department of Homeland Security's widely unlamented Disinformation Governance Board.  Should we be shocked when law enforcement officials create fake accounts to investigate crime on social media?  The Intercept is, of course. Perhaps equally predictably, I'm not. Jane offers some reasons to be cautious—and remarks on the irony that the same people who don't want the police on social media probably resonate to the New York Attorney General's claim that she'll investigate social media companies, apparently for not responding like cops to the Buffalo shooting.  Is it "game over” for humans worried about artificial intelligence (AI) competition? Maury explains how Google Deep Mind's new generalist AI works and why we may have a few years left. Jane and I manage to disagree about whether federal safety regulators should be investigating Tesla's fatal autopilot accidents. Jane has logic and statistics on her side, so I resort to emotion and name-calling. Finally, Maury and I puzzle over why Western readers should be shocked (as we're clearly meant to be) by China's requiring that social media posts include the poster's location or by India's insistence on a “know your customer” rule for cloud service providers and VPN operators.   Download the 408th Episode (mp3)     You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

This week's Cyberlaw Podcast covers efforts to pull the Supreme Court into litigation over the Texas law treating social media platforms like common carriers and prohibiting them from discriminating based on viewpoint when they take posts down. I predict that the court won't overturn the appellate decision staying an unpersuasive district court opinion. Mark MacCarthy and I both think that the transparency requirements in the Texas law are defensible, but Mark questions whether viewpoint neutrality is sufficiently precise for a law that trenches on the platforms' free speech rights. I talk about a story that probably tells us more about content moderation in real life than ten Supreme Court amicus briefs—the tale of an OnlyFans performer who got her Instagram account restored by using alternative dispute resolution on Instagram staff: “We met up and like I f***ed a couple of them and I was able to get my account back like two or three times,” she said.  Meanwhile, Jane Bambauer unpacks the Justice Department's new policy for charging cases under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. It's a generally sensible extension of some positions the department has taken in the Supreme Court, including refusing to prosecute good faith security research or to allow companies to create felonies by writing use restrictions into their terms of service. Unless they also write those restrictions into cease and desist letters, I point out. Weirdly, the Justice Department will treat violations of such letters as potential felonies.  Mark gives a rundown of the new, Democrat-dominated Federal Trade Commission's first policy announcement—a surprisingly uncontroversial warning that the commission will pursue educational tech companies for violations of the Children's' Online Privacy Protection Act.  Maury Shenk explains the recent United Kingdom Attorney General speech on international law and cyber conflict.  Mark celebrates the demise of Department of Homeland Security's widely unlamented Disinformation Governance Board.  Should we be shocked when law enforcement officials create fake accounts to investigate crime on social media?  The Intercept is, of course. Perhaps equally predictably, I'm not. Jane offers some reasons to be cautious—and remarks on the irony that the same people who don't want the police on social media probably resonate to the New York Attorney General's claim that she'll investigate social media companies, apparently for not responding like cops to the Buffalo shooting.  Is it "game over” for humans worried about artificial intelligence (AI) competition? Maury explains how Google Deep Mind's new generalist AI works and why we may have a few years left. Jane and I manage to disagree about whether federal safety regulators should be investigating Tesla's fatal autopilot accidents. Jane has logic and statistics on her side, so I resort to emotion and name-calling. Finally, Maury and I puzzle over why Western readers should be shocked (as we're clearly meant to be) by China's requiring that social media posts include the poster's location or by India's insistence on a “know your customer” rule for cloud service providers and VPN operators.   Download the 408th Episode (mp3)     You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@steptoe.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

In 1998, the U.S. was the first nation to enact a privacy law specifically tailored to protect children's data. Nearly 25 years later, COPPA – the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act – is one of several children's privacy and data protection laws around the world. LinkedIn Vice President and Chief Privacy Officer Kalinda Raina first encountered the draft COPPA bill while interning at the Center for Democracy & Technology. In the years since, she has helped lead the privacy efforts at Nintendo and Apple. With three children of her own, Kalinda has an in-depth knowledge of children's privacy issues, both as a parent and privacy pro. Her passion for the issue led her to start a YouTube channel to help educate parents and kids about privacy and safety issues and to shepherd a new book called “Children's Privacy and Safety,” published by the IAPP. The Privacy Advisor Podcast host Jedidiah Bracy recently caught up with Kalinda to discuss children's privacy, her work, and the new book.

Special Guest- U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana talks Tech Legislation Regulating the data broker industry the "Terms-of-service Labeling, Design, and Readability Act" The Data Elimination and Limiting Extensive Tracking and Exchange Act The Children and Teens' Online Privacy Protection Act, legislation to update online data privacy rules for the 21st century and ensure both children and teenagers are protected online. (Cassidy introduced with Sen. Markey) Health data privacy Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act & the role of governing Social Media General Data Protection Regulation of the EU & The California Consumer Privacy Act, or CCPA, should we expect legislation like that is the US?

Today on The Download from Sound Profitable; Beer gets into video podcast advertising, kids podcast business is booming, and an appeal to private marketplace deals over FAANG, and more. Production company Crooked Media has kicked off a campaign incorporating a purely visual sponsorship into Offline with Jon Favreau, and it’s from a sector not frequently seen in podcasting. Morning Brew’s Alyssa Meyers covered the story last Friday, shining light on a YouTube-focused partnership between Crooked Media and Blue Moon beer, a subsidiary of Molson Coors. “For Blue Moon, Crooked agreed to add title cards that say ‘presented by Blue Moon,’ along with the brand’s logo, to the start of each Offline YouTube episode, Crooked Media VP of commercial marketing and creative strategy Joel Fowler told Marketing Brew.” In addition to the title card and host-read ads in each video, Blue Moon will also buy YouTube ad space specifically on Crooked Media’s YouTube channel. Joel Fowler told Marketing Brew Blue Moon is the first “bigger blue-chip brands that you’re seeing come into the podcast space.” Fowler foresees more Fortune 500 companies embracing multi-media podcast ad campaigns in the near future. Disinformation detection company NewsGuard is looking to provide brand safety by uprooting disinformation in podcasts. According to reporting by MediaPosts’ Joe Mandese: “NewsGuard is said to be in talks with at least three of the ad industry’s big holding companies to fund the new podcast rating service, and would reap a six-month exclusive window as part of the deal.” Mandese connects a renewed industry interest in new brand safety tools for podcasts to the latest controversy surrounding the resurgence of COVID-19 disinformation on Spotify’s The Joe Rogan Experience. NewsGuard aims to provide a personal touch with physical human analysts to employ prior knowledge and context to determine a podcast’s veracity, building lists of safe or problem podcasts as time goes on. While initially NewsGuard’s attempt to adapt their blog fact-checkers for podcasting sounds noble, it raises some eyebrows. It’s a proprietary tool that’ll have six-month exclusivity for the anonymous holding companies funding the project. Their chosen hands-on approach also isn’t scaleable like other solutions currently in production, like that offered by Barometer. Unlike NewsGuard, Barometer is using the publicly-auditable GARM framework and isn’t focusing on exclusivity with a particular investor. It is *The Download’*s opinion that the brand safety problem needs not be solved with proprietary solutions, but with accessible and easily-replicated frameworks. Once again J. Clara Chan over at Hollywood Reporter has some fun developments in the podcasting world. Published last Tuesday, Chan’s The Booming Business of Kids’ Podcasting gives a rundown of the big-name attention kids podcasts are getting. “Podcasts in the kids and family category have seen a 20 percent increase in listenership since 2019, according to NPR and Edison Research’s 2021 Spoken Word Audio Report. Podcast adaptations of hit children’s shows are proliferating, while, conversely, film and TV studios are becoming involved earlier than ever to snap up podcast IP catered toward kids.” That 20% number is likely quite low, as discussed in Lindsay Patterson’s Medium blog on how the Kids & Family category needs an overhaul. Regardless of where the number’s at, it’s good enough to get some big movers interested in kids’ podcasting content. Spotify has produced a podcast spinoff of the viral hit toddler sensory videos CoComelon. GBH Kids is producing an adaptation to continue the recently-retired PBS Kids series Arthur. On the opposite side of the equation Warner Brothers is optioning the TV rights from Gen-Z Media’s unreleased podcast 20 Million Views. According to Ben Strouse, CEO of Gen-Z media while speaking to Hollywood Reporter: “Everyone’s looking for great IP, especially great family IP, which is what we’re counting on.” As YouTube, television, and every other form of media has discovered: making content to entertain kids is profitable. Now podcasting just has to thread the tricky needle of advertising to younger audiences with legislation like the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act severely limiting traditional advertising practices. On Wednesday Michael Korsunsky published the incredibly thorough op-ed “How Publishers Can Lessen Their Dependence on FAANG” in a Wednesday op-ed for Adweek. Korsunsky opens with a quick recap of the alleged handshake deal in which Google offered Facebook perks like lower digital ad fees in exchange for Facebook’s support of Google’s Open Bidding program. News that gives the appearance the F and the G of FAANG are colluding. For those not looking at the transcript: FAANG is an initialism of the five biggest players in tech consisting of Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google. Well, technically with Google becoming an Alphabet company the last letter should be A, but FAANA doesn’t have the same flair. Quirky names aside, Korsunsky’s not happy. “[T]he news is a betrayal of publishers’ trust and highlights yet again the overdominance of the walled garden; it should therefore be treated as a bellwether moment for all digital marketers.” Korsunsky thinks its high time to kick shadowy open marketplaces to the curb and embrace transparent, more direct transactions on private marketplaces. For more background on the perils of open-market programmatic, check out Michael Bürgi’s Digiday piece “Open-market video programmatic is rife with fraud, say buyers, further complicating an already-difficult marketplace.” What does this mean for podcasting? As an industry it’s best poised to expand with programmatic through private marketplaces, providing more transparency and better relationships than open marketplaces. If advertisers get on board with finding this solution more preferable outside of podcasting, it will likely bleed over to increased programmatic sales in podcasting Once again we bring shocking news posted to Twitter. On Monday Digital Content Next CEO Jason Kint posted a Twitter thread analyzing developments in a sizable privacy lawsuit against Google in Northern California courts. The court order calls for Ernst & Young, Google’s independent auditor, to immediately relinquish all files relevant to the suit. Google is also ordered to show cause as to why they should not be sanctioned in light of new information suggesting Google allegedly ordered Ernst & Young to withhold over six thousand sensitive documents relevant to the case. “It’s a bad look for E&Y to be playing this way for Google considering they perform much of the auditing across the advertising industry.” In addition to the advertising industry implications, Ernst & Young is one of the primary auditing firms for certifications, like those through IAB. Continuing The Download’s tendency to experiment and grow, we’ve got two new segments that don’t quite have names just yet. We’re working on it. First up, a brief recap of podcast company funding rounds of note over the last week. On Tuesday Libsyn landed 4.75 million in new equity financing. And as broken in Monday’s Podnews, podcast startup Kaleidoscope secured 3.5 million in funding, as well as a six-show deal with iHeartMedia. For this second and final segment, we want to branch out our occasional honorable mention into a regular highlight of multiple stories we couldn’t fit into today’s episode but are absolutely worth your time to read in full. With that in mind, here are this week’s three must-reads: The Care and Feeding of a Podcast Audience by Tom Webster. Women Podcast Listeners: What We Know Right Now by Caila Litman. Big Tech Always Fails at Doing Radio by Matt Deegan, which might be of special interest to those who remember our coverage of the Amazon AMP app last week. The Download is a production of Sounds Profitable. Today's episode was hosted by Shreya Sharma and Manuela Bedoya, and the script was written by Gavin Gaddis. Bryan Barletta and Evo Terra are the executive producers of The Download from Sounds Profitable. Special thanks to Ian Powell for his audio prowess, and to our media host, Omny Studio.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today on The Download from Sound Profitable; Beer gets into video podcast advertising, kids podcast business is booming, and an appeal to private marketplace deals over FAANG, and more. Production company Crooked Media has kicked off a campaign incorporating a purely visual sponsorship into Offline with Jon Favreau, and it's from a sector not frequently seen in podcasting. Morning Brew's Alyssa Meyers covered the story last Friday, shining light on a YouTube-focused partnership between Crooked Media and Blue Moon beer, a subsidiary of Molson Coors. “For Blue Moon, Crooked agreed to add title cards that say ‘presented by Blue Moon,' along with the brand's logo, to the start of each Offline YouTube episode, Crooked Media VP of commercial marketing and creative strategy Joel Fowler told Marketing Brew.” In addition to the title card and host-read ads in each video, Blue Moon will also buy YouTube ad space specifically on Crooked Media's YouTube channel. Joel Fowler told Marketing Brew Blue Moon is the first “bigger blue-chip brands that you're seeing come into the podcast space.” Fowler foresees more Fortune 500 companies embracing multi-media podcast ad campaigns in the near future.  Disinformation detection company NewsGuard is looking to provide brand safety by uprooting disinformation in podcasts. According to reporting by MediaPosts' Joe Mandese: “NewsGuard is said to be in talks with at least three of the ad industry's big holding companies to fund the new podcast rating service, and would reap a six-month exclusive window as part of the deal.” Mandese connects a renewed industry interest in new brand safety tools for podcasts to the latest controversy surrounding the resurgence of COVID-19 disinformation on Spotify's The Joe Rogan Experience. NewsGuard aims to provide a personal touch with physical human analysts to employ prior knowledge and context to determine a podcast's veracity, building lists of safe or problem podcasts as time goes on. While initially NewsGuard's attempt to adapt their blog fact-checkers for podcasting sounds noble, it raises some eyebrows. It's a proprietary tool that'll have six-month exclusivity for the anonymous holding companies funding the project. Their chosen hands-on approach also isn't scaleable like other solutions currently in production, like that offered by Barometer. Unlike NewsGuard, Barometer is using the publicly-auditable GARM framework and isn't focusing on exclusivity with a particular investor. It is *The Download'*s opinion that the brand safety problem needs not be solved with proprietary solutions, but with accessible and easily-replicated frameworks.  Once again J. Clara Chan over at Hollywood Reporter has some fun developments in the podcasting world. Published last Tuesday, Chan's The Booming Business of Kids' Podcasting gives a rundown of the big-name attention kids podcasts are getting. “Podcasts in the kids and family category have seen a 20 percent increase in listenership since 2019, according to NPR and Edison Research's 2021 Spoken Word Audio Report. Podcast adaptations of hit children's shows are proliferating, while, conversely, film and TV studios are becoming involved earlier than ever to snap up podcast IP catered toward kids.” That 20% number is likely quite low, as discussed in Lindsay Patterson's Medium blog on how the Kids & Family category needs an overhaul. Regardless of where the number's at, it's good enough to get some big movers interested in kids' podcasting content. Spotify has produced a podcast spinoff of the viral hit toddler sensory videos CoComelon. GBH Kids is producing an adaptation to continue the recently-retired PBS Kids series Arthur. On the opposite side of the equation Warner Brothers is optioning the TV rights from Gen-Z Media's unreleased podcast 20 Million Views. According to Ben Strouse, CEO of Gen-Z media while speaking to Hollywood Reporter: “Everyone's looking for great IP, especially great family IP, which is what we're counting on.” As YouTube, television, and every other form of media has discovered: making content to entertain kids is profitable. Now podcasting just has to thread the tricky needle of advertising to younger audiences with legislation like the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act severely limiting traditional advertising practices. On Wednesday Michael Korsunsky published the incredibly thorough op-ed “How Publishers Can Lessen Their Dependence on FAANG” in a Wednesday op-ed for Adweek. Korsunsky opens with a quick recap of the alleged handshake deal in which Google offered Facebook perks like lower digital ad fees in exchange for Facebook's support of Google's Open Bidding program. News that gives the appearance the F and the G of FAANG are colluding. For those not looking at the transcript: FAANG is an initialism of the five biggest players in tech consisting of Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google. Well, technically with Google becoming an Alphabet company the last letter should be A, but FAANA doesn't have the same flair. Quirky names aside, Korsunsky's not happy. “[T]he news is a betrayal of publishers' trust and highlights yet again the overdominance of the walled garden; it should therefore be treated as a bellwether moment for all digital marketers.” Korsunsky thinks its high time to kick shadowy open marketplaces to the curb and embrace transparent, more direct transactions on private marketplaces. For more background on the perils of open-market programmatic, check out Michael Bürgi's Digiday piece “Open-market video programmatic is rife with fraud, say buyers, further complicating an already-difficult marketplace.” What does this mean for podcasting? As an industry it's best poised to expand with programmatic through private marketplaces, providing more transparency and better relationships than open marketplaces. If advertisers get on board with finding this solution more preferable outside of podcasting, it will likely bleed over to increased programmatic sales in podcasting Once again we bring shocking news posted to Twitter. On Monday Digital Content Next CEO Jason Kint posted a Twitter thread analyzing developments in a sizable privacy lawsuit against Google in Northern California courts. The court order calls for Ernst & Young, Google's independent auditor, to immediately relinquish all files relevant to the suit. Google is also ordered to show cause as to why they should not be sanctioned in light of new information suggesting Google allegedly ordered Ernst & Young to withhold over six thousand sensitive documents relevant to the case. “It's a bad look for E&Y to be playing this way for Google considering they perform much of the auditing across the advertising industry.” In addition to the advertising industry implications, Ernst & Young is one of the primary auditing firms for certifications, like those through IAB. Continuing The Download's tendency to experiment and grow, we've got two new segments that don't quite have names just yet. We're working on it. First up, a brief recap of podcast company funding rounds of note over the last week. On Tuesday Libsyn landed 4.75 million in new equity financing. And as broken in Monday's Podnews, podcast startup Kaleidoscope secured 3.5 million in funding, as well as a six-show deal with iHeartMedia. For this second and final segment, we want to branch out our occasional honorable mention into a regular highlight of multiple stories we couldn't fit into today's episode but are absolutely worth your time to read in full. With that in mind, here are this week's three must-reads: The Care and Feeding of a Podcast Audience by Tom Webster. Women Podcast Listeners: What We Know Right Now by Caila Litman. Big Tech Always Fails at Doing Radio by Matt Deegan, which might be of special interest to those who remember our coverage of the Amazon AMP app last week. The Download is a production of Sounds Profitable. Today's episode was hosted by Shreya Sharma and Manuela Bedoya, and the script was written by Gavin Gaddis. Bryan Barletta and Evo Terra are the executive producers of The Download from Sounds Profitable. Special thanks to Ian Powell for his audio prowess, and to our media host, Omny Studio. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today on The Download from Sound Profitable; Beer gets into video podcast advertising, kids podcast business is booming, and an appeal to private marketplace deals over FAANG, and more. Production company Crooked Media has kicked off a campaign incorporating a purely visual sponsorship into Offline with Jon Favreau, and it’s from a sector not frequently seen in podcasting. Morning Brew’s Alyssa Meyers covered the story last Friday, shining light on a YouTube-focused partnership between Crooked Media and Blue Moon beer, a subsidiary of Molson Coors. “For Blue Moon, Crooked agreed to add title cards that say ‘presented by Blue Moon,’ along with the brand’s logo, to the start of each Offline YouTube episode, Crooked Media VP of commercial marketing and creative strategy Joel Fowler told Marketing Brew.” In addition to the title card and host-read ads in each video, Blue Moon will also buy YouTube ad space specifically on Crooked Media’s YouTube channel. Joel Fowler told Marketing Brew Blue Moon is the first “bigger blue-chip brands that you’re seeing come into the podcast space.” Fowler foresees more Fortune 500 companies embracing multi-media podcast ad campaigns in the near future. Disinformation detection company NewsGuard is looking to provide brand safety by uprooting disinformation in podcasts. According to reporting by MediaPosts’ Joe Mandese: “NewsGuard is said to be in talks with at least three of the ad industry’s big holding companies to fund the new podcast rating service, and would reap a six-month exclusive window as part of the deal.” Mandese connects a renewed industry interest in new brand safety tools for podcasts to the latest controversy surrounding the resurgence of COVID-19 disinformation on Spotify’s The Joe Rogan Experience. NewsGuard aims to provide a personal touch with physical human analysts to employ prior knowledge and context to determine a podcast’s veracity, building lists of safe or problem podcasts as time goes on. While initially NewsGuard’s attempt to adapt their blog fact-checkers for podcasting sounds noble, it raises some eyebrows. It’s a proprietary tool that’ll have six-month exclusivity for the anonymous holding companies funding the project. Their chosen hands-on approach also isn’t scaleable like other solutions currently in production, like that offered by Barometer. Unlike NewsGuard, Barometer is using the publicly-auditable GARM framework and isn’t focusing on exclusivity with a particular investor. It is *The Download’*s opinion that the brand safety problem needs not be solved with proprietary solutions, but with accessible and easily-replicated frameworks. Once again J. Clara Chan over at Hollywood Reporter has some fun developments in the podcasting world. Published last Tuesday, Chan’s The Booming Business of Kids’ Podcasting gives a rundown of the big-name attention kids podcasts are getting. “Podcasts in the kids and family category have seen a 20 percent increase in listenership since 2019, according to NPR and Edison Research’s 2021 Spoken Word Audio Report. Podcast adaptations of hit children’s shows are proliferating, while, conversely, film and TV studios are becoming involved earlier than ever to snap up podcast IP catered toward kids.” That 20% number is likely quite low, as discussed in Lindsay Patterson’s Medium blog on how the Kids & Family category needs an overhaul. Regardless of where the number’s at, it’s good enough to get some big movers interested in kids’ podcasting content. Spotify has produced a podcast spinoff of the viral hit toddler sensory videos CoComelon. GBH Kids is producing an adaptation to continue the recently-retired PBS Kids series Arthur. On the opposite side of the equation Warner Brothers is optioning the TV rights from Gen-Z Media’s unreleased podcast 20 Million Views. According to Ben Strouse, CEO of Gen-Z media while speaking to Hollywood Reporter: “Everyone’s looking for great IP, especially great family IP, which is what we’re counting on.” As YouTube, television, and every other form of media has discovered: making content to entertain kids is profitable. Now podcasting just has to thread the tricky needle of advertising to younger audiences with legislation like the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act severely limiting traditional advertising practices. On Wednesday Michael Korsunsky published the incredibly thorough op-ed “How Publishers Can Lessen Their Dependence on FAANG” in a Wednesday op-ed for Adweek. Korsunsky opens with a quick recap of the alleged handshake deal in which Google offered Facebook perks like lower digital ad fees in exchange for Facebook’s support of Google’s Open Bidding program. News that gives the appearance the F and the G of FAANG are colluding. For those not looking at the transcript: FAANG is an initialism of the five biggest players in tech consisting of Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google. Well, technically with Google becoming an Alphabet company the last letter should be A, but FAANA doesn’t have the same flair. Quirky names aside, Korsunsky’s not happy. “[T]he news is a betrayal of publishers’ trust and highlights yet again the overdominance of the walled garden; it should therefore be treated as a bellwether moment for all digital marketers.” Korsunsky thinks its high time to kick shadowy open marketplaces to the curb and embrace transparent, more direct transactions on private marketplaces. For more background on the perils of open-market programmatic, check out Michael Bürgi’s Digiday piece “Open-market video programmatic is rife with fraud, say buyers, further complicating an already-difficult marketplace.” What does this mean for podcasting? As an industry it’s best poised to expand with programmatic through private marketplaces, providing more transparency and better relationships than open marketplaces. If advertisers get on board with finding this solution more preferable outside of podcasting, it will likely bleed over to increased programmatic sales in podcasting Once again we bring shocking news posted to Twitter. On Monday Digital Content Next CEO Jason Kint posted a Twitter thread analyzing developments in a sizable privacy lawsuit against Google in Northern California courts. The court order calls for Ernst & Young, Google’s independent auditor, to immediately relinquish all files relevant to the suit. Google is also ordered to show cause as to why they should not be sanctioned in light of new information suggesting Google allegedly ordered Ernst & Young to withhold over six thousand sensitive documents relevant to the case. “It’s a bad look for E&Y to be playing this way for Google considering they perform much of the auditing across the advertising industry.” In addition to the advertising industry implications, Ernst & Young is one of the primary auditing firms for certifications, like those through IAB. Continuing The Download’s tendency to experiment and grow, we’ve got two new segments that don’t quite have names just yet. We’re working on it. First up, a brief recap of podcast company funding rounds of note over the last week. On Tuesday Libsyn landed 4.75 million in new equity financing. And as broken in Monday’s Podnews, podcast startup Kaleidoscope secured 3.5 million in funding, as well as a six-show deal with iHeartMedia. For this second and final segment, we want to branch out our occasional honorable mention into a regular highlight of multiple stories we couldn’t fit into today’s episode but are absolutely worth your time to read in full. With that in mind, here are this week’s three must-reads: The Care and Feeding of a Podcast Audience by Tom Webster. Women Podcast Listeners: What We Know Right Now by Caila Litman. Big Tech Always Fails at Doing Radio by Matt Deegan, which might be of special interest to those who remember our coverage of the Amazon AMP app last week. The Download is a production of Sounds Profitable. Today's episode was hosted by Shreya Sharma and Manuela Bedoya, and the script was written by Gavin Gaddis. Bryan Barletta and Evo Terra are the executive producers of The Download from Sounds Profitable. Special thanks to Ian Powell for his audio prowess, and to our media host, Omny Studio.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In Elissa Brent Weissman's novel Renegade Reporters, Ash and her best friend Maya get sacked from the daily newscast at their middle school in Federal Hill, so they start their own news team, and soon discover that the software company with the contract for all the public schools in Baltimore is collecting a lot more data about pupils than anyone knew.Join Weissman virtually this Thursday for her book launch with the Ivy Bookshop. Details here.Then we ask a real-life legal expert--UB Law Professor Michele Gilman--about the shortfalls of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. Find more information about privacy rights and protecting your privacy. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How can children enjoy the groundbreaking innovations of the digital age with sufficient guardrails around their personal data? What existing laws and regulations aim to protect children online, and what steps must businesses of all sizes take to comply with them?   On this episode of “Explain to Shane,” https://www.aei.org/profile/shane-tews/ (Shane) sits down with https://www.worldwithoutexploitation.org/bios/rick-lane (Rick Lane), founder and CEO of Iggy Ventures, to discuss why his firm chose to advise and invest in https://regopayments.com/ (Rego Digital Architectures') https://mazoola.co/ (Mazoola) app. Mazoola is the only independently certified family mobile wallet that is compliant with the https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/rules/rulemaking-regulatory-reform-proceedings/childrens-online-privacy-protection-rule (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) of 1998 and https://gdpr-info.eu/ (Europe's General Data Protection Regulation).

In this episode, we discuss the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). It's not nearly as boring as it sounds! - A project Fred's been working on for drip7 - Heather Stratford, Episode 61 - What is COPPA? - Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) in 1998 - COPPA required the Federal Trade Commission to issue and enforce regulations concerning children's online privacy. The Commission's original COPPA Rule became effective on April 21, 2000 - The FTC has an excellent and detailed FAQ: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/complying-coppa-frequently-asked-questions–0 - What is it designed to do? - The primary goal of COPPA is to place parents in control over what information is collected from their young children online. - The Rule was designed to protect children under age 13, while accounting for the dynamic nature of the Internet. - The Rule applies to operators of commercial websites and online services (including mobile apps and IoT devices, such as smart toys) directed to children under 13 that collect, use, or disclose personal information from children, or on whose behalf such information is collected or maintained (such as when personal information is collected by an ad network to serve targeted advertising). - It applies not only to U.S. operators but to foreign ones as well - Does COPPA help to limit child access to inappropriate content? - No. COPPA is not designed to prevent child access to any content online. Its only purpose is to regulate the collection of information from children under the age of 13. - What “personal information” is protected under COPPA? - First and last name; - A home or other physical address including street name and name of a city or town; - Online contact information; - A screen or user name that functions as online contact information; - A telephone number; - A Social Security number; - A persistent identifier that can be used to recognize a user over time and across different websites or online services; - A photograph, video, or audio file, where such file contains a child's image or voice; - Geolocation information sufficient to identify street name and name of a city or town; or - Information concerning the child or the parents of that child that the operator collects online from the child and combines with an identifier described above. - What rights do parents have under COPPA? - If a company, web site, or service is covered by COPPA, it must adhere to the following requirements: - Post a clear and comprehensive online privacy policy describing their information practices for personal information collected online from children; - Provide direct notice to parents and obtain verifiable parental consent, with limited exceptions, before collecting personal information online from children [under the age of 13]; - Give parents the choice of consenting to the operator's collection and internal use of a child's information, but prohibiting the operator from disclosing that information to third parties (unless disclosure is integral to the site or service, in which case, this must be made clear to parents); - Provide parents access to their child's personal information to review and/or have the information deleted; - Give parents the opportunity to prevent further use or online collection of a child's personal information; - Maintain the confidentiality, security, and integrity of information they collect from children, including by taking reasonable steps to release such information only to parties capable of maintaining its confidentiality and security; - Retain personal information collected online from a child for only as long as is necessary to fulfill the purpose for which it was collected and delete the information using reasonable measures to protect against its unauthorized access or use; and - Not condition a child's participation in an online activity on the child providing more information than is reasonably necessary to participate in that activity. - Recent News - #2021–08–29 Angry Birds maker sued for allegedly violating child privacy https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/08/29/angry-birds-maker-sued-by-new-mexico-for-allegedly-violating-coppa - New Mexico's attorney general Hector Balderas alleges that Rovio Entertainment has been collecting and selling the personal data of children under the age of 13 - Balderas also alleges “aggressive targeting” of underage children “through the sale of in-game goods, out-of-game media, and merchandise.” - Allegation that Revio surreptitiously “exfiltrates” the personal information of children and then sells it. - #2021–08–10 Google will add privacy steps for teenagers on its search engine and YouTube. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/10/business/google-youtube-teenagers-privacy.html - #2021–07–08 FTC settles with app for violating COPPA https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=d6c81d0a-d363–4f3e-a5fa–455a3fd83e55 - #2021–07–01 Online Coloring Book App Recolor Settles FTC Allegations It Illegally Collected Kids' Personal Information https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2021/07/online-coloring-book-app-recolor-settles-ftc-allegations-it - #2021–03–18 Facebook is working on a version of Instagram for kids under 13 https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/18/22338911/facebook-instagram-kids-privacy-coppa - #2020–07–27 COVID–19 and COPPA: Children's Internet Privacy in a New, Remote World https://www.natlawreview.com/article/covid–19-and-coppa-children-s-internet-privacy-new-remote-world - #2019–12–18 Parents Sue TikTok for COPPA Violations, Settle for $1.1M https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/parents-sue-tiktok-for-coppa-violations–67961/ - Possible class action against Musical.ly (creator of TikTok) and ByteDance (current owner) - Allegations that defendants “failed to deploy appropriate safeguards,” - #2017–07–28 COPPA and Schools: The (Other) Federal Student Privacy Law, Explained https://www.edweek.org/technology/coppa-and-schools-the-other-federal-student-privacy-law-explained/2017/07

Mattel Films is partnering with MGM to put Polly Pocket on the silver screen. Hasbro and Epic Games are creating a line of Victory Royale toys for Fornite fans. And Kidfluencers are driving over $1 billion in toy sales. The kids market activity is being driven by (1) the explosion in kids screen time and (2) that kids digital viewership overtook linear for the first time in 2020. We highlight the key deals, consumption and regulatory trends, and the evolution of kids business models from subscriptions and FAST streaming apps to digital goods and social commerce.Subscribe to our newsletter. We explore the intersection of media, technology, and commerce: sign-up linkLearn more about our market research and executive advisory: RockWater websiteEmail us: rounduppod@wearerockwater.com--EPISODE TRANSCRIPT:Chris Erwin:So Andrew, have been noticing that media entertainment companies are rapidly investing in building out of kids-focused content verticals as of late. Andrew Cohen:Yeah. We wrote a report about it a few months ago. Because as we track deals in a space, it seems like every week, every month we kept seeing new big announcements around kids content. Chris Erwin:And I think in that report, which came out April 1st, it's on our blog if I remember correctly, that we tracked over 20 major investments, deals and partnerships around digital kids content over the past couple of years. That same deal activity, that trend has continued, if not accelerated. And we're seeing also a particular ramp up in content initiatives by toy manufacturers. So, some of those deals that we referenced in the report, we talked about the launch of new subscription apps for kids. So we saw launches by the New York Times, Amazon, Times, Spotify, Apple, and more. We also saw an increase in ad-based kids content models. So 2B Kids, Roku Kids, and even a cool partnership between NFL and Nickelodeon, creating a unique kids experience for a linear TV and digital stream of NFL game. Chris Erwin:Also, the growth of derivative commerce and partnerships. So like Nastya, a massive global kidfluencer, she did a deal with Will Smith-owned Westbrook Studios. We saw OK Play raise 11 million. And HOMER, another digital app, raise 50 million from Lego, Sesame Workshop and Gymboree. And then even since then the highlights have continued. Back in April, Hasbro and Epic Games came together to create a new line of product, a Victory Royale toys for Fortnite fans. Then in May, MGA Entertainment is moving its L.O.L. Surprise! unboxing brand under more screens and a new film that's going to land on Netflix in October. And then less than a couple of weeks ago, Mattel Films partnered with MGM to develop a new Polly Pocket feature film. So we're seeing all this activity, there's a lot more here than what I've just gone over, but Andrew, why is this happening? Andrew Cohen:So I think it's two main things. One is that visual content consumption among kids is growing at unprecedented rates. So publishers and platforms see an opportunity here to bolster longterm fan loyalty by capturing this first truly digital, first native generation. And two, new regulation is arising that complicates how this viewership is monetized. So starting with the first one, young kids are spending more time today on digital platforms than ever before. Today's generation children is the first to grow up spending more time on visual platforms than on traditional media. And in 2020 to 2021, as this entire generation has been forced to stay home and adopt e-learning, this paradigm shift has only intensified. And 2020 really represented an inflection point in this transition from linear to digital consumption. Andrew Cohen:So really these are not the screens that their parents grew up on, or that we grew up on. Growing up watching Nickelodeon, cartoon networks. In 2020, for the first time children younger than eight we're watching more videos online than on live TV, or even on streaming services. Online videos accounted for nearly 75% of all screen time for young kids. And in the U.S., kids ages four to 15 spent on average 85 minutes per day watching YouTube and 80 minutes a day watching TikTok. Chris Erwin:Just to be clear, Andrew, so that's 165 minutes total between both platforms, right? Andrew Cohen:Yeah, it's crazy. I mean, I don't know how much time I used to spend watching cable as a kid, but seeing those numbers for TikTok and YouTube is really eye-opening. It's the availability of mobile devices and of the internet, I think has been the most significant factor for why kids are spending increasingly more and more time consuming online content. In 2020, 97% of young children live in homes with at least one smartphone, which represents a 54% growth since 2013. So as a result, 170,000 kids go online for the first time every day. And as of 2018, 40% of new internet users globally were children. So when the COVID lockdown started in March, screen-time instantly shot up around 50%. And now over a year later, that percentage still hasn't budged. But Chris, as digital consumption is ramping up, so is the legislation that regulates how we monetize it. Chris Erwin:And it's funny, just I think late last week I was talking to an advisor on privacy regulation and COPPA requirements. And yeah, overall there's growing government regulation and parental concerns around kids' screen time, which makes a monetization of this audience particularly challenging. And with regulation it creates uncertainty. And as we know, investors and operators don't like conducting business where they don't know what the rules are and how it's going to evolve. But yeah, of note, there's also increasing scrutiny by Congress and the government overall about consumer data collection and protections. And as we saw over the past month, there was big new legislation that was just recently proposed. But particularly on children, there's the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. It's also known as COPPA. A lot of people talk about this, but don't know exactly what it is, so let's quickly explain it. Chris Erwin:COPPA requires operators of commercial websites, online services and mobile apps to notify parents and obtain their consent before collecting any personal information on children under the age of 13. The aim of this is they give parents more control over what info is collected from their children online. And this is enforced by the FTC. So yeah, there some violations here over the past couple years that were pretty big. So in 2019, right? Google and YouTube were forced to pay record $170 million fine for violating this law. That same year, TikTok also paid a $5.7 million fine. Over the past couple of months, as Instagram has worked to launch their new kids platform, they've increasingly become under scrutiny, I think from the government and different watch groups as well. Chris Erwin:So speaking to the point of uncertainty and what's changing here, California passed legislation protecting kids up to the age of 16, right? So extending this by three years. And there's now new laws, even at the national level, to extend COPPA to kids up to 16 as well. That is material for all the different brands and marketers and publishers that target audiences in that age range. Overall, as the laws designed to protect kids who are consuming content online are developing and expanding, it's estimated that by the end of 2021 800 million kids will be protected by digital privacy laws, as opposed to only 130 million just in 2018. Chris Erwin:So, that's probably around a four X increase in just the past few years. So what's the main takeaway? Regulation is not going to stop viewership, but it does create uncertainty around monetization. So, companies need to create kid-safe environments that they control. So this is the emergence of new business models that are direct-to-consumer with subscriptions, dedicated apps and digital experiences, new ad based models, and then derivative commerce, right? Monetizing through alternative products like physical and digital goods. So Andrew, let's expand on that. Andrew Cohen:Yeah. So you just mentioned subscriptions, and we're seeing that kids content is really a secret weapon to bolster LTV, its lifetime value for subscription services, which is kind of the golden metric for them. And when you think about it that way, it's no wonder that everyone from Netflix, Disney+, Apple TV+, Paramount+, HBO Max, Spotify, New York Times, Amazon, Time Magazine, the works, everyone who you named up top and more, are investing so much in building out their kids vertical across subscription platforms. Andrew Cohen:The role of kids in the streaming wars is particularly interesting. It's an effective tool to onboard two generations of subscribers with parents and kids, thus boosting customer acquisition, and also allows them to develop sticky habits that reduce churn, boosting customer retention. So kids content not only drives customer acquisition for subscription services by promoting signups among parents, there's also an opportunity to kind of skate to where the puck is going by providing an early stage on-ramp to younger audiences who are now going to grow up with these platforms and develop meaningful user relationships. And as these younger audiences begin building habits on these platforms at an early age, they're only going to come more and more valuable to these platforms over time. So that's the subscription model. But as you mentioned, Chris, with COPPA, it's making ad-based models a bit tricky. So you want to talk about that? Chris Erwin:So even though with all the new regulation and watch group scrutiny, the ad-based business models around kids content is trickier. Companies are still going to navigate it because it's still a huge, big market and it's growing quickly. So, let's talk about some stats here. 61% of parents say they are more attentive when watching TV with their kids than when they're watching alone. How does that translate into potentially buying more products? Chris Erwin:Well, parents are 250% more likely to buy products that they see advertised while watching with their kids. And then, parents spend 59% more than non-parents across categories. So, when there's co-consumption between parent and child of content, parents are leaning in, they're engaged more, they're more likely to buy products, they're more likely to spend than their non-parent counterparts in across all those categories. That's very powerful. It's thus no wonder that the kids digital advertising market is projected to grow by over 20% between 2018 and 2021, culminating in 1.7 billion by the end of this year, which is projected to make up around 37% of the total kids advertising spend. So I think there's a third new revenue line here to also consider, Andrew, which is derivative commerce. Tell us about that. Andrew Cohen:Yeah. So, kids IP franchises are the most viable path to the diversified revenue flywheel that all content brands are striving for regardless, kids and not kids. And this is really best epitomized by Disney model flywheel that we've seen. I think it's really interesting to note that 13 of the 16 highest grossing media franchises are from kids' IP. And the vast majority of revenue generated by these franchises comes from merchandise. So really the kids' audience, I think, is the most prime to spend on consumer products around the content and the characters that they love. Traditionally, we've seen this with Blockbuster, franchises on the big screen from Disney, but now we're starting to see it with kind of small screen visual influencers as well, led by Ryan's World and pocket.watch. Chris Erwin:And this is an example, Andrew, that everyone loves to talk about, but let's dive into the specific data here. So this is probably the leading example of the kids digital content flywheel. So pocket.watch's digital content portfolio has 7.4 billion video views each month, powers a massive consumer products division of over a hundred licensees across multiple categories. Chris Erwin:So Ryan's World in particular, over 29 million YouTube subs, generating over a million hours of video views each day. Their total retail empire has surpassed over $500 million in revenue. And they're selling consumer products everywhere from Walmart to Amazon, to FAO and more. In 2020 alone, Ryan's World CP generated more than 250 million in sales. Now I think from our research, Ryan and his family takes home around 30 million in revenue across their whole business. And for the first time last year, I think they saw around 60 to 70% of that 30 million come from their consumer products division. That's the first time it has outpaced their YouTube ad revenues, a very big new trend for that family and also for kidfluencers overall. And then also another big note, Ryan's World launched their own virtual world on Roblox last year, where fans can purchase gems that can be exchanged for virtual goods and more. And then we're going to see a lot more of these virtual activations by kidfluencers going forward. And Andrew, I think there's some other detail you have there. Andrew Cohen:Definitely. I think when you look at where kids are spending time and money, you have to talk about gaming, and specifically the metaverse. The top metaverse platforms each command one to one and a half billion hours of playtime per month. So it's no wonder why not only Ryan's World, but also toy companies like Lego, Hasbro, Mattel are all activating these virtual spaces. And not only is that where they're spending their time, like I said, it's where they're spending their money. Sometimes on physical products, but oftentimes on virtual products and in-app purchases. So 82% of free children's apps, those made for kids five to 12, offer in-app purchases. In 2020, in-app purchases generated 31 billion in revenue. A prime example of this is Kim Kardashian, whose kids friendly, free-to-play mobile game generated $200 million per year, mostly through these in-app purchases. So it's definitely... I think probably the next great frontier of kids content and commerce. Chris Erwin:So Andrew, I think we are really at the end of our time. So I think the takeaway here is that content is driving these massive new revenue streams across overall kids entertainment and kids experiences. There's a lot more activity to track here. We'll have to get to it in a future roundup. So I'll just have to say Andrew, till next time. Andrew Cohen:Next time. See you then.

COPPA, Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, is meant to regulate applications and services directly targeted to children. This episode talks about the details of what COPPA states and a research report that showed 1 in 5 kid's apps in the Google Play store are not meeting COPPA requirements. Source COPPA Text - https://bit.ly/2U0Tmz4 Be aware, be safe. Get ExpressVPN, Secure Your Privacy And Support The Show Become A Patron! Patreon Page *** Support the podcast with a cup of coffee *** - Ko-Fi Security In Five —————— Where you can find Security In Five —————— Security In Five Reddit Channel r/SecurityInFive Binary Blogger Website Security In Five Website Security In Five Podcast Page - Podcast RSS Twitter @securityinfive iTunes, YouTube, TuneIn, iHeartRadio,

The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act or COPPA has been around since 1996. So why was it suddenly in the headlines in 2020? We explore this law, its purpose and what consequences it has on the world of online content and advertising. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

* Émission spéciale pour enfant * À l'occasion de cette dernière série dans le décor de Prières Inspirées, Jérémy a invité son ami, le singe Kofé ! Et en plus de faire une banane d'anniversaire avec vous les enfants, Jérémy va vous partager un message très intéressant. Alors... à vos bananes ! Les commentaires de cette vidéo pour enfant ayant été désactivés par Youtube selon la loi COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act), si vous voulez encourager notre singe, rendez-vous sur notre site et commentez sous la vidéo ici : https://emcitv.com/jeremy-sourdril/video/pour-enfant-un-singe-dans-prieres-inspirees-174316.html - MERCI !

This episode originally aired on Sep. 14, 2020. If your kids are going to school online, then one thing you’re probably concerned about is the data that’s being collected about them, and how it’s being stored and used. Well, there are some rules — actually, lots of them. You’ve probably heard of COPPA, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, and perhaps FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Those are both federal laws governing data collection and kids. And, in the last six years, states have passed dozens more student privacy laws. But the problem is not everyone knows about them. Molly talks about it with Amelia Vance of the nonprofit Future of Privacy Forum.

This episode originally aired on Sep. 14, 2020. If your kids are going to school online, then one thing you’re probably concerned about is the data that’s being collected about them, and how it’s being stored and used. Well, there are some rules — actually, lots of them. You’ve probably heard of COPPA, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, and perhaps FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Those are both federal laws governing data collection and kids. And, in the last six years, states have passed dozens more student privacy laws. But the problem is not everyone knows about them. Molly talks about it with Amelia Vance of the nonprofit Future of Privacy Forum.

This episode originally aired on Sep. 14, 2020. If your kids are going to school online, then one thing you’re probably concerned about is the data that’s being collected about them, and how it’s being stored and used. Well, there are some rules — actually, lots of them. You’ve probably heard of COPPA, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, and perhaps FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Those are both federal laws governing data collection and kids. And, in the last six years, states have passed dozens more student privacy laws. But the problem is not everyone knows about them. Molly talks about it with Amelia Vance of the nonprofit Future of Privacy Forum.

This episode originally aired on Sep. 14, 2020. If your kids are going to school online, then one thing you’re probably concerned about is the data that’s being collected about them, and how it’s being stored and used. Well, there are some rules — actually, lots of them. You’ve probably heard of COPPA, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, and perhaps FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Those are both federal laws governing data collection and kids. And, in the last six years, states have passed dozens more student privacy laws. But the problem is not everyone knows about them. Molly talks about it with Amelia Vance of the nonprofit Future of Privacy Forum.

If your kids are going to school online, then one thing you’re probably concerned about is the data that’s being collected about them, and how it’s being stored and used. Well, there are some rules — actually, lots of them. You’ve probably heard of COPPA, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, and perhaps FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Those are both federal laws governing data collection and kids. And, in the last six years, states have passed dozens more student privacy laws. But the problem is not everyone knows about them. Molly talks about it with Amelia Vance of the nonprofit Future of Privacy Forum.

If your kids are going to school online, then one thing you’re probably concerned about is the data that’s being collected about them, and how it’s being stored and used. Well, there are some rules — actually, lots of them. You’ve probably heard of COPPA, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, and perhaps FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Those are both federal laws governing data collection and kids. And, in the last six years, states have passed dozens more student privacy laws. But the problem is not everyone knows about them. Molly talks about it with Amelia Vance of the nonprofit Future of Privacy Forum.

If your kids are going to school online, then one thing you’re probably concerned about is the data that’s being collected about them, and how it’s being stored and used. Well, there are some rules — actually, lots of them. You’ve probably heard of COPPA, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, and perhaps FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Those are both federal laws governing data collection and kids. And, in the last six years, states have passed dozens more student privacy laws. But the problem is not everyone knows about them. Molly talks about it with Amelia Vance of the nonprofit Future of Privacy Forum.

If your kids are going to school online, then one thing you’re probably concerned about is the data that’s being collected about them, and how it’s being stored and used. Well, there are some rules — actually, lots of them. You’ve probably heard of COPPA, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, and perhaps FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Those are both federal laws governing data collection and kids. And, in the last six years, states have passed dozens more student privacy laws. But the problem is not everyone knows about them. Molly talks about it with Amelia Vance of the nonprofit Future of Privacy Forum.

This week’s APPropriate podcast is about COPPA - The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act - a federal law which, both is designed to protect our kids’ online data, AND has established 13 as the age of “Internet adulthood.” Download today and learn more about COPPA’s history, its guidelines, how the concept of Personal information has changed since the Internet happened, and what you can do as a parent to support and supplement the COPPA standards for your kid/s.

On January 9, 2020, Representatives Tim Walberg (R-MI) and Bobby Rush (D-IL) sponsored the "Preventing Real Online Threats Endangering Children Today," or "PROTECT Kids" act before the US House of Representatives. At roughly the same time, technology advocacy group "Tech Freedom" held a panel on the future of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), YouTube, and the role of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in respect of both. The panel would be attended by YouTube heavyweights Jeremy Johnston of J House Vlogs, and Kreekcraft, among others. The two events could not represent two more wildly divergent views of the future of content generation on the Internet and what it can and should be. What does the PROTECT Kids Act purport to do? How will raising the age of "children" to 16 effect an increased and even more difficult role to manage for the FTC? How would it hurt many if not most "social" applications and their related business models? And how would such an effect ultimately hurt the very children it's purported to protect? We never scramble the English language for the benefit of acronyms...in Virtual Legality. CHECK OUT THE VIDEO AT: https://youtu.be/RS6kpVlVy-I #YouTube #COPPA #FTC *** Discussed in this episode: "YouTube At Large" YouTube Playlist - Hoeg Law https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1zDCgJzZUy8BFeoOUFCRYmb92fkWbm58 "Will Kids' Privacy Crackdown Break the Internet?" TechFreedom Panel - January 13, 2020 https://techfreedom.org/save-the-date-will-kids-privacy-crackdown-break-the-internet/ "TAKEAWAYS FOR CONGRESS: 1) Raising #COPPA's age from 13 to 16 would make things even more confusing... @jhousevlogs" Tweet - January 13, 2020 - @TechFreedom https://twitter.com/TechFreedom/status/1216777632307609600 "Bipartisan bill would give parents more power to protect their kids online" Engadget - January 9, 2020 - Igor Bonifacic https://www.engadget.com/2020/01/09/us-lawmakers-introduce-protect-kids-act/ "A BILL To amend the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998." HR 5573 - Introduced January 9, 2020 https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/5573/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22protect+kids%22%5D%7D&r=4&s=1 "CHILDREN’S ONLINE PRIVACY PROTECTION" 15 USC Chapter 91 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/chapter-91 COPPA Rule Final Rule Amendments FTC Document - 2013 https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/2012-31341.pdf "PART 312—CHILDREN'S ONLINE PRIVACY PROTECTION RULE" Code of Federal Regulations https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=4939e77c77a1a1a08c1cbf905fc4b409&node=16%3A1.0.1.3.36&rgn=div5 *** FOR MORE CHECK US OUT: On Twitter @hoeglaw At our website: https://hoeglaw.com/ On our Blog, "Rules of the Game", at https://hoeglaw.wordpress.com/

Along the Line, is a member of the Demcast network, brought to you by the Media Freedom Foundation. On today’s episode hosts Nicholas Baham III (Dr. Dreadlocks), Janice Domingo,  and Nolan…

COPPA, the law that every content creator on the internet is worried about right now, is going to impact all creators in some way but should you go through the trouble of adding disclaimers to the beginning of your video or limiting the content you make in order to make sure you don't violate COPPA and get fined? This episode addresses two questions about COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) and shares my thoughts on if you should mark your videos "for kids" or "not for kids" and how to approach the situation in general.Support the show by getting everything you need for your YouTube channel at http://nickscontent.com (http://nickscontent.com) About the host:I’m Nick Nimmin, I have been on YouTube since September of 2014. I’m YouTube certified and I have a YouTube channel where I share the information I have learned from working with clients, studying YouTube and experimenting on my own channel that I have grown to almost 500,000 subscribers. My mission is to help content creators, like you, leverage the power of YouTube and online video by sharing the information, tools and resources you need to succeed on a competitive platform so you can put good into the world with your content.If you enjoy the podcast, please write a review and share it with a YouTuber friend. Thanks!

South Korea's Hopes for Unification Hinge on North Korea's Nukes (0:31)Guest: Joon-yong Park, Consul General, Consulate General of the Republic of Korea in San FranciscoNegotiations over North Korea's nuclear weapons have been at a standstill for months. Meanwhile, North Korea has done a series of missile launches and threatened to resume nuclear weapons tests if the US doesn't come back to the negotiating table by the end of the year. How Ageism is Defining the Work Experience for All Generations (16:12)Guest: Robert McCann, Ph.D., Professor of Management Communications, UCLA Anderson School of ManagementLook around the typical office in America and you're likely to see a wide range of ages. The oldest Gen Z-ers now starting out in the workplace. The oldest Millennials are about to turn 40. Gen-Xers are filling out a lot of the management and executive suites alongside Baby Boomers who are delaying retirement in significant numbers. It's a situation ripe for miscommunication and age-discrimination. Co-Housing: Modern-Day Communal Living (34:00)Guest: Karin Hoskin, Executive Director of the Cohousing Association of the US and Resident of Wild Sage, a Co-Housing CommunityNeighbors are a mixed bag for most people. We love ‘em, but man they can get on our nerves when they let their yard get messy or keep their dog outside all night barking. At least you can always put up a fence. We're good at that in America. But some people do the opposite. They create co-housing communities where everyone shares common indoor and outdoor spaces, like kitchens and gardens. Trauma of the Parents (53:42)Guest: Randy Jirtle, Professor of Biology, North Carolina State UniversityDid you know that life experiences of your parents and grandparents may be embedded in your genes? For example, a recent study of Civil War and US Census data found that the sons of soldiers held in particularly harsh prison camps during the war had shorter lives. We're talking about the sons of the soldiers – sons who weren't even alive during the war. How can that be that a father might pass his own emotional or physical trauma down to a child through his genes? (Orginally aired 10/24/19)  YouTube and the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (1:10:23)Guest: Robbie Bagley, Creator Behind the Channel “Working with Lemons”Kids love YouTube. Everybody knows that –including YouTube, which has spent years telling advertisers it's the go-to site for reaching youngsters. And that's exactly what landed YouTube in deep trouble with federal regulators. There are laws about what kinds of information you can collect on kids under the age of 13 without parental permission. YouTube has not been doing a good job following those laws. So, in September, the company settled with the Federal Trade Commission and New York State for $170 million and promised to change the way it makes money off content targeted at kids. Those changes are causing a big stir among YouTubers who make those videos. Some say their ad revenue will just dry up completely and they'll stop creating content. Is this the end of Kids YouTube? No more videos of people unboxing toys? Or playing with dolls? Or playing Minecraft? Or re-enacting scenes from Disney cartoons? Advocating for Your Child's Literacy Needs (1:28:21)Guest: Rachel Wadham, Host, Worlds Awaiting on BYUradio, Education and Juvenile Collections Librarian, BYU

Noname Gypsy threatens to quit music. The new James Bond trailer is out. Youtube's CEO, Susan Wojciki speaks with 60 Minutes about applying the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act to the platform starting Jan. 2020! Follow me on Twitter/Instagram: @TSI_Pod / @isiddavis Podcast IG: @thesocialintrovertpodcast Snapchat: sidkneedavis Send emails to: thesocialintrovertpodcast@gmail.com & sid.davis@bynkradio.net Intro Song: Smoke DZA & Curren$y - Cinderella Story Outro Song: Smoke DZA - Christmas Evening On 100

Kun menet nukkumaan kuin nuori ja heräät kuin vanhus, on pakkasi varmasti sekaisin! Petteriä valvotti Irishman ja Jonia mm. Mando, ja järkyttävät kokemukset Bumblebeestä! Hilpeyttä elämään tuo COPPA ( Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) mikä on saanut tubettajat kauhusta tutisemaan! Mutta, osuuko oma contentti poikia nilkkaan? Meno on suhteellisen levotonta alusta loppuun joten pieni varoitus on paikallaan. Tervetuloa! Show-Notes: 00:49:22 Viihdeuutiset: Rise of Skywalkerin käsikirjoitus Ebayssa, Mustan Pantterin starba Teräsmieheksi?, Michael Jacksonille tehdään Bohemian Rhapsodyt, Doctor Doom Wakandaan?, Kissanainen kävi parturissa (kyllä, tämä on uutinen) eikä Batmanilla haba kasva, Ruffalo haluaa otta matsia Wolviksesta 01:22:20 Peliuutiset: Kissanainen ja Batman vaihto osia hilpeällä tavalla, Nähdäänkö Metroid-sarjasta kaksi remakea ensi-vuonna? Call of Dutyn reippaasti ILMAISTA pelattavaa, Microsoftia ei VR kiinnosta! 01:35:31 Temppari-Teltta: Vihdoinkin sänky natisee ja naamat värisee, 02:06:40 Katsottuna: The Mandalorian jaksot 2. The Child ja 3. The Sin Jos haluat tukea meitä pienellä summalla niin se onnistuu [tästä linkistä!](https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_donations&business=7G7HJVZQNAED6¤cy_code=EUR&source=url) Löydät meidät netistä: * [Nerdic Youtubessa](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN3U-FL-DVfv-DVNsEr3Vxw/) * [Twitterissä](https://twitter.com/nerdicpodcast) * [Twitchissä](https://www.twitch.tv/nerdicpelaa) * [Instargramissa](https://www.instagram.com/nerdic_podcast/) * [Nerdicin Kotisivut](https://nerdicpodcast.podiant.co/) * [Discord](https://discord.gg/XtfKEvX) Castilaisia pääsee stalkkaamaan mm. * [Jonin Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/joni_vaittinen/) * [Markuksen Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/keisari/) * [Petterin Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/pepemies/) * [Keisarin nettisivut MULTIVISIO](http://multivisio.fi/)

Once again, the Government is committing crimes against the internet!!! I guess Pence will just pardon them. Topics Include: The never ending saga of Donald Trump vs. the evil fake new; or, how Donald Trump is going to get Impeached. COPPA - Children's Online Privacy Protection Act; or how YouTube may have just screwed over everyone. Relevant Links: Game Theory: Will Your Favorite Channel Survive 2020? (COPPA)

Seanorama and FastFretFingers preview the next episode with their very special guests and the new game of versus, inserting James Beaver's gauntlet aspect into the game. Seanorama drives by the CN strike as they discuss that during some hazardous road conditions. They have a lengthy discussion about COPPA (The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act), how that is going to affect their show, their presence on YouTube and the future of the show. #coppa #canadianrailways #winter #driving #gauntlet #versus #youtube #patreon #antidrake Theme song by Todd McGinity Search SeanGeek Podcast on: Apple Podcasts; Google Podcasts; Spotify; Iheart Radio; TuneIN: Podbean; Castbox; Podcast.com Website: www.seanmcginity.ca@seangeekpodcast on Facebook and Instagram@fastfretfingers on Instagram@ToddGeeks Tech Talk on Facebook @seangeek on Twitter

Seanorama and FastFretFingers preview the next episode with their very special guests and the new game of versus, inserting James Beaver's gauntlet aspect into the game. Seanorama drives by the CN strike as they discuss that during some hazardous road conditions. They have a lengthy discussion about COPPA (The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act), how that is going to affect their show, their presence on YouTube and the future of the show. #coppa #canadianrailways #winter #driving #gauntlet #versus #youtube #patreon #antidrake Theme song by Todd McGinity Search SeanGeek Podcast on: Apple Podcasts; Google Podcasts; Spotify; Iheart Radio; TuneIN: Podbean; Castbox; Podcast.com Website: www.seanmcginity.ca@seangeekpodcast on Facebook and Instagram@fastfretfingers on Instagram@ToddGeeks Tech Talk on Facebook @seangeek on Twitter

Alternate Current Radio Presents, in collaboration with Mark Anderson - Stop The PressesHesher of the infamous BOILER ROOM live radio show joins Mark Anderson for a discussion about how the FTC and YouTube will be instituting changes to the YouTube terms of services as content creators become legally liable under COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act). Extinction Rebellion is another topic of discussion in this episode.

Seanorama and FastFretFingers preview the next episode with their very special guests and the new game of versus, inserting James Beaver's gauntlet aspect into the game. Seanorama drives by the CN strike as they discuss that during some hazardous road conditions. They have a lengthy discussion about COPPA (The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act), how that is going to affect their show, their presence on YouTube and the future of the show. #coppa #canadianrailways #winter #driving #gauntlet #versus #youtube #patreon #antidrake Theme song by Todd McGinity Search SeanGeek Podcast on: Apple Podcasts; Google Podcasts; Spotify; Iheart Radio; TuneIN: Podbean; Castbox; Podcast.com Website: [www.seanmcginity.ca](http://www.seanmcginity.ca)@seangeekpodcast on Facebook and Instagram@fastfretfingers on Instagram@ToddGeeks Tech Talk on Facebook @seangeek on Twitter Support this podcast

Tonight I am joined by my good friend Roberto Blake as we discuss all things related to #COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) and the effect it'll have on Youtube going forward! Follow Roberto at the links below! Ian Corzine's Update on COPPA Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwnvjuCTb54&t=3s On Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/user/robertoblake2 Creator Gear Guide: https://www.youtube.com/user/robertoblake1 Awesome Creator Academy: https://www.awesomecreatoracademy.com/ Follow him on Twitter and Instagram @robertoblake If you'd like to support this podcast, consider buying me a coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/vyyyper Check out my Youtube channel here: http://youtube.com/1vyyyper You can also follow me on Twitter @Vyyyper --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/vyyyper/support

Is Google Over-Reaching Into People’s Lives? One of Google’s recent patents appears to be geared towards sending people relevant purchase decision information while they’re in physical stores, including remote help and even sending a store associate to them.  YouTube Cleaning Up Its Act on Children’s Content As part of its $170 FTC settlement for violating the privacy of children under COPPA (Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act), YouTube is now implementing big changes affecting advertisers. Wall Street Journal Accuses Google of Changing Search Results The WSJ’s far-ranging descriptions of how Google is manipulating search results to shape what users see had very little evidence to back it up, and showed a lack of understanding for how search works.

In today's podcast we discuss YouTube's new rules under the FTC's COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) laws, and how these are going to affect content creators like myself. Check it out!Want to know more about COPPA? Check the following links.FTC's official website: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/busin...INC. Newsletter:https://www.inc.com/encyclopedia/chil...Google Support:https://support.google.com/youtube/an...vidIQ's website:https://vidiq.com/blog/post/coppa-kid...The Verge:https://www.theverge.com/2019/11/13/2...Nerdist:https://nerdist.com/article/youtube-f... See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

YouTubers Are Lobbying FTC to Fight Child Privacy Law ExpansionBy Mark Bergen, Lucas Shaw, and Ben BrodyNovember 5, 2019, 5:00 AM EST Service agreed not to run ‘personalized’ ads on kids’ videos Move ‘will cause more harm than good,’ according to petitionLISTEN TO ARTICLE 4:06SHARE THIS ARTICLEShareTweetPostEmailIn this articleGOOGLALPHABET INC-A1,301.86USD-10.73-0.82%A group of online video creators is protesting the Federal Trade Commission’s plan to regulate kids’ videos on YouTube, claiming new rules will hurt them financially and reduce the quality of programs on the world’s largest video site.On Tuesday, producers of prominent children’s YouTube channels will appeal to the FTC to change its recent settlement with the video service and will circulate a new petition online urging certain changes.In September, the FTC fined YouTube and its parent, Alphabet Inc.’s Google, $170 million for violating privacy laws by tracking children online. With the settlement, YouTube also agreed not to run “personalized” advertisements -- which rely on web browsing behavior and other targeting data -- on videos it decided are aimed at kids.“Shutting off personalized ads on creators’ content will cause more harm than good, especially for children,” reads the Change.org petition. “Quality family-friendly content will shrink, while more mature content will grow -- yet kids will still be watching.”The petition was started by Jeremy Johnston, a creator whose channel, J House Vlogs, has nearly 2 million subscribers. Johnston said he has met with multiple FTC commissioners about the issue. “I was surprised about how little they knew about the YouTube creator perspective,” he said. Johnston described his meetings with the agency as “really productive.”Videos for kids are among the most-watched on YouTube. Cocomelon, a channel of nursery rhymes, is the third-most-popular channel on the site, according to SocialBlade. Like Nastya, a child video blogger, ranks fifth.Tough SpotThe popularity of kids’ programming has put YouTube in an uncomfortable position. The company has maintained that the site isn’t for children, and doesn’t allow viewers under the age of 13. It created a separate app for kids, but its audience is about 1% the size of YouTube’s total reach.The internet obliterated many of the safeguards on children’s media. While television networks have strict regulations about what material they can and can’t show -- and some kids’ TV networks don’t accept advertising -- there are no such rules online.The FTC is in the process of reviewing how technology companies collect data on minors, a practice regulated under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA. The agency fined ByteDance Inc., which owns the video app TikTok, $5.7 million earlier this year. The law was also used in the case against YouTube. The FTC now is weighing updates to COPPA.Many video creators are anxious about those updates and the new restrictions on YouTube, which go into effect in January. The rules place the onus on the creator to identify if their programming is for kids, rather than YouTube. And the creators could face significant fines for not complying.When the restrictions on personalized ads go into effect, some YouTubers may see a decline in their revenue from the video service. Those rule punish creators unfairly, Johnston said.”The truth of the matter is that parents aren’t as concerned about personalized ads as the FTC makes it out to be,” he said.Spokeswomen for YouTube and the FTC declined to comment.The creators behind the petition want the FTC to delay enforcement of any new laws and keep them from applying to a wider swath of videos. Of particular concern is the way the agency defines a video for children. During an FTC public meeting last month, agency staff discussed a shift in the definition from online media “directed to kids” and those that attract minors.“‘Child-attractive’ could be anything on YouTube,” said Melissa Hunter from Family Video Network, another organizer behind the petition. “We feel that’s way too broad. And that shows a lack of understanding about YouTube.”YouTube has said it will comply with the new rules, but it has also encouraged creators to express their views. The company sent a notice to creators over the summer informing them of a workshop with the FTC. “It is important they hear from creators and small businesses that could be deeply impacted by potential changes,” a YouTube representative wrote, according to an email viewed by Bloomberg News.

Content Creators are in a panic on Youtube about the ongoing enforcement of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act or COPPA. Many content creators feel that by complying with COPPA this puts them at a disadvantage as YouTube creators. To explain COPPA and why it's being enforced on Youtube is Senior Attorney of FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection Peder Magee. For more information about COPPA visit: FTC.GOV https://masonverapaine.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/41.-Youtube-and-COPPA-Peder-Magee.mp3

Google and its subsidiary, YouTube, recently entered into a record $170 million settlement with the Federal Trade Commission and the New York Attorney General over allegations that YouTube unlawfully collected children’s personal information. It is the largest settlement ever under COPPA, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, which prevents companies from using child-directed online services to collect data on children under 13 without parental consent. Kristin Cohen, Assistant Director of Privacy and Identity Protection at the FTC, breaks down the YouTube settlement and talks about its impacts on the greater business community. Critics of the settlement have pointed out that $170 million is just two days of Alphabet, Inc., Google’s parent company’s, profits. Cohen discusses the FTC’s view of the deterrent effect of the settlement and offers takeaways for companies that are creating content. Cohen also discusses the FTC’s COPPA rule review and its priorities going forward. Listen and subscribe to Law X.0 from your mobile device: Via Apple Podcasts | Via Stitcher | Via Overcast | Via Spotify   Hosts: Dori Goldstein and Meg McEvoy Guest: Kristin Cohen, Assistant Director of Privacy and Identity Protection, Federal Trade Commission Producers: RJ Jewell and Nicholas Anzalotta-Kynoch

This week, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission announced its settlement with Google and its subsidiary YouTube as a historic moment and a "game changer" for enforcement under the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. Google will pay $170 million and YouTube must implement various changes to the way it manages content creators on its site and the way they treat content geared toward children. It's the largest COPPA settlement ever obtained, but there's been criticism, including from FTC commissioners themselves. In this episode of The Privacy Advisor Podcast, Linnette Attai discusses COPPA enforcement to date and whether this settlement is in fact, as the FTC has touted, a "game changer." 

Examining "Social Media Bias" with Jen Schradie Jen Schradie joined Joe Miller on the WashingTECH Tech Policy Podcast to discuss her work challenging the alleged "social media bias" that has been claimed by conservatives. Bio Jen Schradie is an Assistant Professor at the Observatoire sociologique du changement (OSC) at Sciences Po in Paris. Previously, she was a Research Fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, based at the Toulouse School of Economics, as well as at the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme et de la Société, Université de Toulouse. She received her PhD from the Department of Sociology at the University of California-Berkeley with a designated emphasis in New Media from the Berkeley Center for New Media. She also has a master’s degree from the Harvard Kennedy School. Her broad research agenda is to interrogate digital democracy claims with empirical data. Despite recent panic about digital threats to democracy, many theorists have still suggested that the Internet can enable a more participatory, pluralist society, but her research challenges these claims, spanning three areas: the digital divide, digital activism, and digital labor. Schradie has found that inequalities, ideologies, and institutions shape participation in our new information society. Released in May of 2019 by Harvard University Press, The Revolution That Wasn’t: How Digital Activism Favors Conservatives, traces what she calls the Digital Activism Gap. Rather than early utopian claims of Facebook and Twitter Revolutions or more recent dystopian ones of Russian bots, state-sponsored hacking, or fake news farms, she reveals a more insidious problem. Instead of the internet spawning democracy or then taking it away, it does not have a life of its own. A Digital Activism Gap is driven by social class inequalities, organizational hierarchies, and reformist conservatism. The prototype of the radical left digital protester did not fit the mold of the 34 groups she studied in North Carolina. Digital activists were much more likely to be Tea Party members than student anarchists. These findings challenge the view of the internet as a pluralist space for social movements. This research, funded by the National Science Foundation, has also generated three journal articles in The International Journal of Communication, Social Problems and Social Media + Society. She has published four articles on what she coined as “digital production inequality.” After articles on this topic were published in Poetics and Information, Communication and Society, the publicity she garnered from these publications earned her the 2012 Public Sociology Alumni Prize at UC Berkeley. Currently, she is examining egalitarian claims of tech start-up entrepreneurs in a comparative research project between France and the United States. Her current projects are on the digital economy – a comparative study between France and the United States and the role of the state in mediating risk with start-ups, with a focus on gender and class inequality. She is also working on a European Commission funded project with partners in the UK and Italy to analyze online hate speech against Muslims. Before entering academia, Schradie directed six documentary films, including, “The Golf War – a story of land, golf and revolution in the Philippines.” Most of her films, however, focused on social movements confronting corporate power in the American rural South. Schradie’s documentaries have screened at more than 25 film festivals and 100 universities. She is also a beginning banjo player and an occasional yoga teacher. Resources The Revolution that Wasn't: How Digital Activism Favors Conservatives by Jen Schradie (Harvard University Press, 2019) News Roundup AOC says it’s OK to block Twitter users New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says that public officials should be able to block certain Twitter users for harassment. Ocasio-Cortez tweeted that she blocks only a tiny percentage of users. She also tweeted that users are free to speak their minds, even if others find that speech offensive, but that no one should have to require themselves to be subjected to harassing or abusive speech. Interestingly, a federal appeals court found that the president, because he uses Twitter in his official capacity, can’t constitutionally block users.   FCC activates disaster reporting for Dorian The Federal Communications Commission activated disaster reporting for Hurricane Dorian as the hurricane moved up the east coast over the weekend. The FCC wants communications providers in affected areas to provide updates on outages via The Disaster Information Reporting System (DIRS) at https://www.fcc.gov/nors/disaster/. Tariffs on China begin to take effect The tariffs that Trump promised to impose on China as part of his trade war against the country went into effect on Sunday. The tariffs will affect some $110 billion worth of Chinese imports across a broad range of goods. Another tranche of tariffs on $160 billion worth of Chinese goods like laptop computers and other consumer devices is set to take effect on December 15th. Google announces hacking attempt Google publicly announced a hacking attempt that it found and reported to Apple back in February that targeted iPhones. The company said that going to certain websites using your iPhone gave hackers access to your data by installing malware that would run in the background without your knowledge. Hackers were then able to do things like copy your photos or even access encrypted messages sent via apps like Facebook Messenger or Telegraph. Google representative Ian Beer advised consumers to continue to be wary of the possibility of being hacked, even on devices with robust security features. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey’s account hacked Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey’s Twitter accounted was hacked last week. The hackers commenced to tweet racial slurs and other offensive messages until the posts were deleted within the hour, the Hill reports. Twitter says the hackers gained access to the account due to a security oversight by the wireless carrier that exposed Dorsey’s phone number. Report: Google to pay up to $200 million to FTC Politico reported Friday that Google will have to pay up to $200 million to settle allegations that YouTube violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, which prohibits companies from collecting data from children under 13 without parental consent.  Some were disappointed by the news, including Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey, who said the penalty wouldn’t be high enough. Google contract workers vote to unionize A group of ninety or so contract workers at Google voted to unionize last week, challenging how the company treats them compared to their full-time employees with whom they, in many cases, work side-by-side. With the help of the United Steelworkers union, about 2/3rds of the data analysts and other white collar professionals voted to unionize. The petition now heads up to the National Labor Relations Board which may formally authorize a union vote. Fort Collins launches municipal broadband The city of Fort Collins, Colorado is launching its own municipal broadband network offering up to 1GB of broadband for $60/month. Right now, the service targets 20-30 households but the city’s looking to ramp up. Jon Brodkin at Ars Technica reported that the cable industry vigorously opposed the effort. But voters approved the build out anyway.

  Alexandra Channer: Automation, Displacement and Slavery in Southeast Asia (Ep. 166) Alexandra Channer joined Joe Miller to discuss how automation is leading to labor abuses and slavery in Southeast Asia. Bio Dr. Alexandra Channer (@channer_alex) is a human rights advisor for business, helping to identify and mitigate impacts resulting from their commercial activities and relationships. She has a technical background in risk analysis and due diligence for labour standards, civil and political rights and community impacts. In her previous role, Alex was principal analyst and head of human rights strategy at Verisk Maplecroft. In this role, Alex supported multinationals with global supply chains in the technology, extractives, food and beverage, and apparel sectors. Areas of focus included modern slavery, human rights defenders and automation. Alex’s approach is enriched by her doctorate in politics - involving eight years of fieldwork on grievance-based mobilisation in Kosovo - as well as experience working in political communications. Alex learnt Albanian in Kosovo and translates plays and books in her spare time. Key services: Modern slavery training workshops and e-learning programmes Gap assessments of human rights management systems Stakeholder consultation    Disclosure statement support Risk and impact assessments Issue briefing, horizon scanning Resources Slavery and labour abuses in SE Asia supply chains set to spiral over the next two decades as automation consumes job market by Alexandra Channer (Verisk Maplecroft, 2018) Confidential documents obtained by UK’s Parliament suggest Facebook sold data Two-hundred fifty pages of confidential documents obtained by a UK Parliamentary committee from a company embroiled in litigation with Facebook in the U.S. seem to reveal that Facebook sold data to certain buyers as it sought to grow. Zuckerberg denies that allegations. But the trove of emails between Facebook and a company called Six4Three contain several communications with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg that seem to discredit his assertion that Facebook never sold users’ data. In other Facebook news, The Wall Street Journal reports that Facebook’s board of directors backs Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg’s handling of the anti-Semitic campaign against George Soros. And Facebook plans to a buyback of $9 billion more of its shares to boost investor confidence after a stock slump of more than 40% since July. Verizon’s Oath to pay a $5 million settlement in child data protection lawsuit Verizon’s Oath has agreed to pay $5 million to the New York State attorney general to settle charges that its AOL unit violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998, also known as COPPA. It’s the largest settlement paid by a company in COPPA history. New York’s Attorney General had accused AOL of displaying ads on children’s sites even though AOL’s policies prohibited it.  Sapna Maheshwari has more in The New York Times. FCC watchdog clears Pai of collusion with the White House The FCC’s own, internal Inspector General has completed an investigation of FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. It found that Pai didn’t violate ethics rules when he failed to disclose conversations he’d had with former White House counsel Don McGahn regarding the Sinclair merger because the FCC’s rules didn’t prohibit the conversation even though the FCC is not a cabinet-level agency and is supposed to be independent of the White House. Margaret Harding McGill has the story in Politico. Google contract employees push for better working conditions Google’s contract employees are pushing for better working conditions. In a letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Googler’s are calling for inclusion in corporate-wide communications as well as equal pay and better treatment. The contract workers, known internally as TVCs, are also referred to as Google’s “shadow workforce”. And they were excluded from Google’s new policies regarding sexual harassment which the company began implementing following the walkout of thousands of employees world-wide protesting the company’s handling of Andy Rubin’s departure, after he’d been accused of sexual misconduct—an accusation Mr. Rubin has denied. The contract employees say that Google’s $30 billion in profit this year alone is more than enough for the company to compensate them fairly. Google accelerates closure of Google+ Google has found a new bug exposing user data to some 52 million users. The company had already planned to shut down Google+ by the end of next year, but it has accelerated the closure to August. Google CEO Sundar Pichai is set to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on today, Tuesday, December 11th and the new data breach is sure to be an issue.  

Allie Bohm is the Policy Counsel at Public Knowledge, a non-profit advocacy organization based in Washington DC. Today, she and Sima Vasa discuss the existing privacy and consumer policies in the United States. Allie Bohm - Policy Work Expert Prior to Public Knowledge, Allie dedicated most of her time at law school. She also spent 7 years at CLU doing policy work. Now, she is working to help promote the freedom of expression, an open internet, and access to affordable communications tools and creative works. Privacy Policies in the USA In the absence of a privacy law, there are a few things in place. One is the Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPP), which the Department of Housing, Education, and Welfare established in the 1960s. "We need a comprehensive privacy law and we don't have one." - Allie Bohm FIPP serves as the basis of many discussions on privacy in the industry and in the United States. But, it never became law. There are a number of sector-specific ones instead. Among which are the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act, the Cable Privacy Act, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, and the Video Privacy Protection Act. State laws also exist. Support from the Federal Trade Commission For anything which doesn't fall under these laws, according to Allie, there is Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. It penalizes unfair, deceptive practices. "It was not created for the Internet Age but the FTC has been created about using it here." - Allie Bohm An activity is considered deceptive when its recipient doesn't know about it. For unfairness, there has to be substantial harm and a legally recognizable harm. Also, harm must not be reasonably avoidable. Quick links to connect with Allie Bohm: Website - Public Knowledge LinkedIn Twitter Sima loves to hear from her listeners with input, questions, suggestions and just to connect! You can find her at the links below! LinkedIn Twitter simav.sg-host.com Sima is passionate about data and loves to share, learn and help others that share that passion. If you love data as much as her, subscribe on iTunes and don't forget to leave a rating and review!

  Chelsea Barabas: How to balance AI and criminal justice (Ep. 136) MIT Research Scientist Chelsea Barabas and Joe Miller discuss how to balance AI and criminal justice to affect better defendant outcomes. Bio Chelsea Barabas (@chels_bar) is a research scientist at MIT, where she examines the spread of algorithmic decision making tools in the US criminal justice system. Formerly, Chelsea was the Head of Social Innovation with the MIT Media Lab’s Digital Currency Initiative. She has worked on a wide range of issues related to the use of emerging technologies to serve the public good around the world. Chelsea’s graduate research at MIT was on understanding the U.S.’s ongoing struggle to cultivate and hire a diverse technical workforce, and she conducted her graduate thesis in partnership with Code2040. She attended Stanford as an undergraduate, where she earned a B.A. in Sociology.  Resources Chelsea Barabas, Karthik Dinakar, Joichi Ito, Madars Virza, and Jonathan Zittrain. 2018. Interventions over Predictions: Reframing the Ethical Debate for Actuarial Risk Assessment. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT*) conference (FAT* 2018). ACM, New York, NY, USA. Virginia Eubanks, Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor (2018) News Roundup T-Mobile and Sprint announce merger plans T-Mobile and Sprint have announced merger plans again. It’s a $27 billion deal that would include Softbank giving up control of Sprint.  The combined company would be called T-Mobile and, with 98 million subscribers, the combined company would become the second largest wireless carrier, behind Verizon’s 116 million. Brian Fung and Tony Romm report in the Washington Post. Comcast launches bidding war against Fox for Sky Comcast announced that it would seek to acquire European pay TV provider Sky for $31 billion. The Murdoch’s 21st Century  Fox already has a bid for Sky on the table, but it’s $15 billion lower than Comcast’s, even though Fox already has a 39% stake in Sky. 21st Century Fox had rejected a separate bid by Comcast to acquire Fox’s entertainment assets, which Disney is now planning to purchase for $52.4 billion, which was also lower than Comcast’s proposal. Shalani Ramachandran, Amol Sharma and David Benoit report in the Wall Street Journal. EU investigates Apple’s Shazam bid EU antitrust regulators are investigating whether Apple’s bid for music identification service Shazam is anticompetitive. Apple had announced back in December that it was looking to acquire Shazam for an undisclosed amount. The EU is concerned the acquisition could limit consumer choice. Foo Yun Chee has more at Reuters. Senate confirms Nakasone to Lead NSA/Cyber Command The Senate unanimously confirmed U.S. Army Command Chief Lt. Gen. Paul Nakasone to serve as both the head of the National Security Administration and U.S. Cyber Command. He’ll replace Mike Rogers. Nakasone will also get a fourth star. SEC fines company formerly known as Yahoo! $35 million The Securities and Exchange Commission fined Altaba, the company that now owns Yahoo!’s remaining assets, over $35 million. The fine is for failing to disclose a 2014 data breach that compromised the data of over 500 million Yahoo! users. Jacob Katrenakes reports in the Verge. FTC warns app firms about collecting children’s data The Federal Trade Commission has warned app firms in China and Sweden about collecting the data of U.S. children. The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act prohibits the collection of such data and applies to foreign companies. The China based- Gator Group and Sweden-based Tinitell, both sell smartwatches to children. In other news related to Children's privacy, YouTube has announced new parental controls for YouTube kids. Parents will now be able to limit recommendations and suggestions will now be made by humans. Did Diamond and Silk commit perjury? In testimony before the House Judiciary Committee last week, conservative African American internet personalities Diamond and Silk said under oath that President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign never paid them. But there’s a 2016 Federal Election Commission (FEC) filing showing that the campaign paid them $1,275 for “field consulting”. Harper Neidig reports in the Hill. CBC members to meet in Silicon Valley to discuss diversity The Congressional Black Caucus is sending the largest delegation of lawmakers it has ever sent to Silicon Valley to discuss diversity. Just 3% of Silicon Valley tech workers are black, according to a Center for Investigative Reporting study. Shirin Ghaffary reports in Recode. Facebook warns SEC about more data misuse In a Securities and Exchange Commission filing, Facebook indicated that additional reports of the misuse of user data are likely forthcoming. The social media giant said it is conducting a third-party audit which it anticipates will reveal additional improprieties. Google’s Sergey Brin warns about AI threat Finally, Google co-founder Sergey Brin warned in the company’s annual Founders’ Letter about the future of AI and the fact that it is already transforming everything from self-driving cars to planetary discovery. Brin said he is optimistic about Artificial Intelligence and said that Alphabet is giving serious consideration to the ways in which AI will affect employment, how developers can control for bias in their algorithms, and the potential for AI to “manipulate people.” James Vincent notes in the Verge that Brin’s letter does not discuss the dangers of using AI for military intelligence, although the company has said its technology would be used for “non-offensive purposes only”. Still, several employees at the company are urging Alphabet to withdraw from its plans to work with the Pentagon.

A coalition of more than 20 child-health, privacy, and consumer groups is asking the Federal Trade Commission to investigate whether YouTube is violating a federal law designed to protect children on the internet. The groups are expected to file a complaint with the FTC on Monday. The relevant federal law, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA, requires website operators to obtain parents' permission when collecting personal data about children younger than 13.

Richard Chapo (“chap-oh”), a lawyer for 24 plus years, is a well-known Internet business lawyer in Southern California. Richard’s philosophy is to proactively position his clients to minimize their potential exposure to lawsuits. He provides advice to clients as large as multinational corporations and as small as hobby bloggers with an eye towards eliminating potential problems areas before lawsuits are filed. Richard is versed in a variety of Internet laws including the DMCA, Communications Decency Act, and Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, as well as FTC compliance guidelines, state privacy mandates, and recurring billing laws. Richard Chapo Vroom Veer Stories Started working as a lawyer in 1992, working 70-hour weeks; got burnt out Spent a year in Siberia drinking beer and vodka working 3 hours a day Started working in Internet law in the early 2000's when it was the wild west New privacy laws in Europe are going in effect in May 2018; huge compliance issue Asia business compliance not so much of an issue for most small businesses How privacy in the US is mostly a joke; we have an "opt out" culture Europe is more of an "Opt in" culture vs "Opt out" in the US Did you know; people can't post baby pics on FB in the EU Richard Chapo Links Richard's Website Facebook Twitter LinkedIn

Religious organizations and other nonprofits are not subject to the rules under the Child Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), but COPPA's rules provide a good example of how to deal with information collected from children under 13. It requires verifiable parent consent, online privacy statements, and options for parents to control how providers use their children's information. Since it sets the standard in the United States for protecting children online, Josh encourages religious organizations to follow its rules even when they aren't required to do so. Resources FTC Frequently Asked Questions about the Child Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) FTC video: "Protecting Children's Privacy Under COPPA" United Methodist Church Communications: "Privacy and Permissions" ELCA resource: "Social Media and congregations" Wikipedia: "Children's Online Privacy Protection Act" Subscribe to the Law Meets Gospel Podcast iTunes Google Play RSS Support the Law Meets Gospel Podcast Patreon.com Sign up to contribute an amount you choose for each episode the Law Meets Gospel Podcast publishes.

A lawyer for 24 plus years, Richard Chapo (“chap-oh”) is a well-known Internet business lawyer in Southern California. Richard's philosophy is to proactively position his clients to minimize their potential exposure to lawsuits. To this end, he provides advice to clients as large as multinational corporations and as small as hobby bloggers with an eye towards eliminating potential problems areas before lawsuits are filed. Richard is versed in a variety of Internet laws including the DMCA, Communications Decency Act, and Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, as well as FTC compliance guidelines, state privacy mandates, and recurring billing laws. During This Show We Discuss… Potential legal issues people may face when running an online business Steps people should take to protect themselves when running an online business Potential legal issues people should be aware of when they have a website or app How to avoid getting sued New changes to laws that may impact those who run online businesses What you should do right from the beginning of starting an online business to reduce your risk of lawsuits What can be done to protect yourself against others stealing your website content, and how you can monitor to see if people are How to protect yourself from others infringing on your copyright New requirements are out there for online businesses that offer recurring business models Why every business should have a privacy policy, and what should be in it The disclosures and disclaimers you should have on your website or app Why would promising not to sell, share, or rent the personal information of your visitors could kill your business in the long run What you should do if you get a demand letter about using an image without permission How to stay in compliance with the FTC The rights you have if a person leaves an inaccurate review about you online And much more...

A lawyer for 24 plus years, Richard Chapo (“chap-oh”) is a well-known Internet business lawyer in Southern California. Richard’s philosophy is to proactively position his clients to minimize their potential exposure to lawsuits. To this end, he provides advice to clients as large as multinational corporations and as small as hobby bloggers with an eye towards eliminating potential problems areas before lawsuits are filed. Richard is versed in a variety of Internet laws including the DMCA, Communications Decency Act, and Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, as well as FTC compliance guidelines, state privacy mandates, and recurring billing laws. http://www.socalinternetlawyer.com/

These days, it's just so hard for parents to compete against today's addictive nature of being constantly connected to the world wide web. Our guest today, Jonathan McKee will provide practical steps you can take to connect with your smartphone obsessed kid. Jonathan McKee is the author of 52 Ways to Connect with Your Smartphone Obsessed Kid. Jonathan has over 20 years of youth ministry experience and speaks to parents and leaders worldwide. He provides free resources for youth workers and parents. Also you can follow Jonathan on his blog, getting a regular dose of youth culture and parenting help. How to Connect with Your Smartphone Obsessed Kid Sometimes things arrive in our cultural scene so hard and fast; that, as a people, we get blindsided. Then our reaction becomes nothing more than a failure to respond. I believe that this is what has happened in the case of today's smartphone situation with our kids. We're such a hustle-bustle society that we never paused to think through the ramifications of putting this kind of access in the hands of kids. Before parents could blink; virtually every kid in America had a phone with information, ideas, entertainment, voice, power and smut at their fingertips 24/7. The technology moved faster than our wisdom could increase, as well as our ability to make and/or amend laws. Think about it. We still have laws for where, how and what time and days smut and vice for adults can be found and displayed in certain neighborhoods or inside the four walls of certain retail outlets; yet, our kids too often have none of these same safety measures. This makes the privacy of their own bedrooms virtually as dangerous as the seedy side of town! They have access to some of the vilest sexual images that no previous generation of adults ever had. But, not only that, today's kids can personally connect with others from anywhere around the world to share, embellish and even participate in this smut in a virtual Sodom and Gomorrah any time day or night. I think if we had time to do it all over again, we might realize that smartphones are actually adult toys! And, so, I say that Christians ought to look at a complete paradigm shift when it comes to carte blanche giving some of these things to our kids—just for the sake of being culturally relevant. There are just some things we can't trust kids to possess till they've reached a certain maturity level like voting and drinking. As I see it, this one slipped by us. We discuss this point and the following: The truth behind the laws and the experts stance on social media. What is the "Children's Online Privacy Protection Act" (COPPA)? The role that the book of Deuteronomy plays in addressing the smartphone phenomenon. The two extremes of the parenting continuum; either too strict or not involved. Family engagement seems to be lacking due to our culture's obsession with smartphones. How to filter the content on your kid's phone. How to set your child up for success. The importance of giving your kid the keys. Picture provided by pixabay.com.

Late in 2013 Roy Smith, founder of AgeCheq, helped us understand the implications that COPPA is going to have on the mobile app industry. COPPA is the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act and we've all been waiting for something to happen - for the FTC to find and fine the first infractor. Roy promised to come back and explain the findings when this actually happened and, just this past month, the FTC levied fines on two companies - Yelp and TinyCo - for COPPA-related violations.   Roy held up his end of the bargain and here is that conversation. We talk about the infractions against the two companies, the implications on both Yelp and TinyCo and our industry as well as a list of 5 tips to ensure you are - and remain - COPPA-compliant.    Full show notes can be found here:

PRIVO – Privacy Vaults Online Inc. – was established to enable web sites to comply with COPPA - the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. Denise Tayloe, co-founder and CEO of PRIVO, spoke with Regarding ID's Gina Jordan about the project. PRIVO was awarded $1.6 million for the first year of the pilot. If the company meets its milestones, it'll get about the same amount for year two. Tayloe says they'll start by establishing a Minors Trust Framework with 50 different relying parties. "It'll create an online identity trust model compliant with COPPA and the new rule update, and then other nuances around children – transactions on the Internet," Tayloe says. "Just the fact that they're minors, there are things that need to be taken into consideration for the framework."