The FAA reauthorization bill is making its way through Congress at the moment, which probably sounds about as exciting as snail racing. But this is the last major piece of legislation expected to be completed during this session, so the usual suspects are rushing to try to add all sorts of completely unrelated amendments to it in order to force a vote on some of their pet projects. One of these that's drawing considerable attention is a proposal known as The Kids Online Safety Act or KOSA. What's not to like, right? Who doesn't want to keep kids safe? KOSA has drawn some bipartisan support, but it has its detractors as well, including Rick Santorum. The way the bill is phrased, it could readily be interpreted as turning over control (read as censorship) to Big Tech, letting them fill in for the Democrats' abandoned Ministry of Truth and decide which content is "safe" and which isn't. Santorum warns that this could easily result in the tech platforms choosing to selectively block conservative opinions and content "for the sake of the children." (Mediaite)

“Social and family values conservatives should be especially wary about advancing the so-called ‘Kids Online Safety Act.’ Not only will this bill vastly increase the chances of kids and parents having their identities stolen online via the provisions in § 102 and § 108 of the bill. If passed, KOSA will also undoubtedly result in more content of the type that conservatives in states like Florida have been trying to keep away from kids making its way onto their screens thanks to § 102.

“It will facilitate digital censorship of culturally conservative views, and even appears to create a new iteration of the Biden Disinformation Board whose makeup also happens to look like it will be determined by applying DEI principles and possibly staffed by regulators hand-picked by Randi Weingarten and the AFT— the exact people who caused so much damage to children during the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Weighing in from the other side was Senator Marsha Blackburn. She accused Santorum of being "a front for Big Tech" in opposing KOSA. She claims that the legislation is strictly intended to protect children from harmful online content and it contains "specific provisions included to protect freedom of speech and ensure content cannot be censored." That sounds great at first glance, but we're immediately shoved back into an argument over definitions and who has the final call in such decisions. That's precisely what was wrong with the entire Ministry of Truth concept. 

No legislation can define every single idea or type of content that might show up, so the person who gets to call all of the balls and strikes in the gray areas immediately gains a vast amount of control whether you want to call it censorship or not. Does everyone need yet another reminder of everything that Big Tech was doing during the pandemic, almost entirely at the behest of the Biden administration? Would content raising questions about the safety or efficacy of Pfizer's vaccines be deemed "dangerous to children?" Might cautions about illegal migrants committing violent crimes be determined to be too frightening for kids to read? I think you can see where this is going.

If we lived in a more sane and sensible world, this wouldn't be all that difficult of a problem. If you post any kiddie porn, your content is banned and you are arrested. Threats of physical violence are treated similarly. Graphic sexual content should be blocked from the devices of underage users if that's still even possible today. But opinions are opinions and they are not all created equal. That doesn't mean that either the government or the Big Tech companies should be able to take them down while hiding behind the excuse of "protecting the children." It's easy enough to point to someone and declare that they are wrong, but people are allowed to be wrong and others are allowed to debate them and offer facts and alternate explanations. We don't need an umpire for this sort of thing. 

There may wind up being an easier way out of this morass. KOSA obviously has nothing to do with the FAA. Some leaders from both parties are already expressing concern over allowing completely unrelated amendments to be attached to this bill because it could endanger the passage of the primary legislation. If enough people push back, they could be forced to trim the bill down to only matters related to the Federal Aviation Administration. That's how all of these bills should be treated. If people want to pass KOSA that badly, have them introduce it as a standalone bill and hold a roll call for it, with everyone going on the record.