New York Times seeks to block “child privacy” law

During a hearing late last month, the judge overseeing the case and tech group repeatedly used the Times as an example to test how the California law would work. In one particular exchange, the judge seemed to acknowledge that the law could restrict news content.

“The ultimate content is the content of the article itself, correct?” District Judge Beth Labson Freeman asked.

“The problem with the statute is the effect on what the New York Times will do. Will it publish an article about war that might be harmful? Will it now allow minors access to its site? You know, that’s the kind of decision that the Times will have to make,” the NetChoice attorney Ambika Kumar said.

The decision by the Times to side with the tech industry group in the case represents how the paper increasingly is not just a passive observer of major trends in the online media business, but a major player.

By suing in federal court, tech and media companies are hoping to get in front of a wave of new child privacy laws that they say would damage their businesses. California isn’t alone: Oregon, Connecticut, Maryland, and Minnesota have all introduced legislation similar to California’s new child privacy law.

The wave of laws has clearly alarmed leaders at the Times, who are concerned that state lawmakers are not thinking through the serious ramifications of the laws. One source familiar with the conversation told Semafor that the paper recently participated in an off the record briefing with Maryland lawmakers to discuss the consequences of a similar law currently being debated by legislators in the state.

As written, the California law seems vague. As the Orange County Register points out, the law empowers state regulators to force websites to remove content that they deem “materially detrimental to the physical health, mental health, or well-being of a child,” but does not define what constitutes harm. The Times said it would likely force the paper to enact age verification standards and essentially block teens from reading the news.

Jim Steyer, a former Stanford law professor whose organization Common Sense Media has played a key role in writing and advocating for stricter childrens’ data privacy rules, said the Times is misreading the law, and offered to brief New York Times lawyers.

“This is an unfortunate day for the vaunted New York Times,” the Common Sense CEO said. “We would never sponsor a bill that would do what the Times is saying. This is a possibly well-intentioned but ill informed reaction to the statute.”

He continued: “This is showing that the Times is increasingly a tech company, business-wise, and reflects their increasing coziness with big tech. I understand it, but it does not necessarily lead to good outcomes when it comes to kids.”