Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8612

Bill Overview

Title: Stop the Censorship Act

Description: This bill limits a social media company's immunity from liability for screening and blocking offensive content on its platform. The bill applies such immunity when the company restricts content that is unlawful rather than merely objectionable. Under current law, such immunity also applies to actions taken to enable or make available the technical means to restrict access to material that is objectionable. The bill instead specifies that this immunity applies to actions taken to (1) make available the technical means to restrict access to material that is unlawful, or (2) provide users with the option to restrict access to any material.

Sponsors: Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-4]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals who use social media platforms

Estimated Size: 240000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Content Creator (New York, NY)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I rely on social media algorithms being fair and unbiased. If this bill means more of my content is removed or demoted, my business could suffer.
  • I'm concerned about overreach if 'unlawful' isn't clearly defined.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 7
Year 2 5 8
Year 3 6 8
Year 5 7 9
Year 10 8 10
Year 20 9 10

Software Developer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 32 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think it's about time we held these platforms accountable for what's spread on their networks.
  • Clarifying 'unlawful' needs to be a priority, but overall, less censorship could be beneficial for open discussion.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 6

Public School Teacher (Chicago, IL)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If this means less fake news, that's great, but the balance must be right.
  • I want assurance that educational content won't be unjustly restricted.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 9 6

Retired Engineer (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I often find objectionable content that's misinformation, so this might not help.
  • The challenge will be in implementation and ensuring a fair process.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 5

Student (Austin, TX)

Age: 18 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm worried this bill might cause more censorship of things I care about talking about.
  • But it could also be nice if it means less trolling and harassment.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 7 8
Year 3 8 9
Year 5 8 9
Year 10 8 10
Year 20 8 10

Journalist (Seattle, WA)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • A clearer focus on 'unlawful' vs. 'objectionable' could help reduce bias in content moderation.
  • I support holding platforms accountable for the spread of false information.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 10 6

Small Business Owner (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If algorithm changes against my visibility, my business could be impacted negatively.
  • But if it means more control over ad targeting and content visibility, that might help.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 9 5

Influencer (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 21 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • More clarity on 'unlawful' content could prevent unnecessary takedowns of my content.
  • But I'm wary if it results in heavier restrictions overall.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 6

Police Officer (Houston, TX)

Age: 38 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could help reduce false narratives that spread online.
  • Important to ensure that lawful criticism isn't wiped out in the process.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

University Professor (Boston, MA)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • A focus on 'unlawful' content could harm academic discussion if platforms are too cautious.
  • I support clearer rules but they must consider academic contexts.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $800000000)

Year 2: $450000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $750000000)

Year 3: $400000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $700000000)

Year 5: $250000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $500000000)

Year 10: $100000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $200000000)

Year 100: $20000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $50000000)

Key Considerations