WASHINGTON — Social media companies could be held liable for promoting content that is responsible for radicalizing users and prompting them to cause harm, according to a new bill introduced by Sen. John Curtis, R-Utah, on Wednesday.
The Algorithm Accountability Act would reform Section 230 to no longer offer protections from tech companies if it can be proven that the platforms knowingly used an algorithm to amplify content responsible for causing harm. The change would instead mandate that companies “own” the content, which would allow individuals to sue them directly.
“Section 230 was written nearly 30 years ago for a very different internet,” Curtis said in a statement. “What began as a commonsense protection for a fledgling industry has grown into a blanket immunity shield for some of the most powerful companies on the planet — companies that intentionally design algorithms that exploit user behavior, amplify dangerous content, and keep people online at any cost. Our bill will hold them accountable.”
In practice, the bill would establish requirements for social media platforms to “design, train, test, deploy, operate, and maintain their recommendation-based algorithm to prevent foreseeable bodily injury or death.” It would also provide a “clear civil right of action” to take legal action.
The legislation would still carve out protections for free speech by barring enforcement “based on viewpoint or expression.” It would also allow states to implement similar laws so long as they provide equal or stronger user protections.
Curtis introduced the bill alongside Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., after the pair first announced the legislation at an event last week confronting the nation’s epidemic of political violence.
“Too many families have been hurt by social media algorithms designed with one goal: make money by getting people hooked,” Kelly said in a statement. “Over and over again, these companies refuse to take responsibility when their platforms contribute to violence, crime, or self-harm. We’re going to change that and finally allow Americans to hold companies accountable.”
The bill would alter Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 30-year-old bill that offers certain protections to online platforms so they are not liable for certain content posted by users. That curtain of protection is outdated in the current social media landscape, Curtis argued, as it was passed in 1996 before these social media companies and AI algorithms existed.
“If they’re responsible for something going out that caused harm, they are responsible. So think twice before you magnify. Why do these things need to be magnified at all?” Curtis told the Deseret News last week.
The bill comes after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, who was shot and killed during a September event at Utah Valley University by a gunman the FBI suggested was radicalized by time spent online in obscure social media forums. Early details from the investigation had also revealed the alleged killer had been “engulfed” by “a radical left ideology,” Utah Gov. Spencer Cox previously told the Deseret News.
“Utah has led the nation in passing laws to protect children from the harms of social media, but these challenges don’t stop at state lines. We need a national standard for accountability,” Cox said in a statement on Wednesday. “By establishing a duty of care for social media platforms, this bill will help protect families across the country from the deceptive and addictive algorithmic designs that put profit above people. It’s time for Congress to act.”
Curtis has long pushed for increased regulation of social media platforms, rejecting arguments from some advocates that the tech companies are protected by the First Amendment. In a hearing with top tech executives last month, Curtis asserted that company executives must “own” their decisions on what content to amplify on their sites.
Curtis has compared the current online landscape to Senate hearings in the 1990s during which tobacco companies testified that nicotine was not an addictive substance and that there were no harmful effects of tobacco — which later proved to be false.
It’s not yet clear if or when the bill will get a vote in the Senate.