Hold Social Media Platforms Accountable For Endangering Californians (CA-SB 771)

SB 771 clarifies that a social media platform may be liable for civil penalty under existing law if and when its algorithms or AI aid or abet individual users who are engaging in already unlawful intimidation of others in online spaces.   According to a 2024 report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), a substantial number of internet users have experienced online hate in the recent past. While hateful speech is problematic, it is not illegal. However, it can cross the line into illegal action when it threatens others. For example, when hate speech maliciously targets others, such as when it is “brought to the doorstep” of marginalized communities, it is no longer protected speech, but unlawful intimidation, terrorism, and threat. This means that you can post flyers with anti-immigrant messages on your own physical door or electronic Facebook wall; however, if you maliciously post those same flyers on the physical doors of immigrant families, or on their virtual Facebook walls, you are now engaging in intimidating and threatening behavior–which is unlawful.   In January of this year, Meta dramatically altered its practices on platforms, which had previously sought to mitigate the impacts of hateful content and protect historically targeted groups.   While social media platforms are not responsible for the speech of individual users, aspects of social media platforms, such as algorithms or AI, can be complicit in not only the intensification of hateful beliefs but also their proliferation across a given platform. This includes being complicit in the targeting of marginalized groups with hate, which is unlawful. Meta has not announced any effort to prevent its AI from acting in tandem with individuals’ efforts to credibly threaten or intimidate targeted groups through the platform, efficiently making sure those targeted are receiving messages on their electronic doorstep by being barraged by such threats and intimidation.