Home>Articles>AB 35: Disclosure of Social Media and False Info

AB 35: Disclosure of Social Media and False Info

To reduce the spread of harmful, verifiably inauthentic content?

By Chris Micheli, December 9, 2020 12:47 pm

On December 7, the first day of the California Legislature’s 2021-22 Session, Assembly Member Ed Chau introduced Assembly Bill (AB) 35, which would require disclosure of social media policies. AB 35 would add Chapter 22.4 (commencing with Section 22595) to Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code.

AB 35 would require a person that operates a social media platform to disclose whether or not that social media platform has a policy or mechanism in place to address the spread of misinformation. AB 35 would require the disclosure to be made easily accessible on the social media platform’s website and mobile application.

In addition, AB 35 would authorize the Attorney General or any district attorney, county counsel, or city attorney to enforce violations of its provisions and would subject a person to a civil penalty of $1,000 for each day the person is in violation of the bill’s provisions.

Section One of the bill would add Chapter 22.4 (commencing with Section 22595) to Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code. Chapter 22.4 would be titled “false information.” Section 22595 would require a social media platform to disclose whether or not it has a policy or mechanism in place to address the spread of misinformation with respect to, at a minimum, all of the following:

  • Reducing the spread of misinformation that contributes to the risk of imminent violence or physical harm.
  • Reducing the spread of harmful, verifiably inauthentic content.
  • Practices intended to deceptively and substantially manipulate or disrupt the behavior of users on the social media platform.

In addition, a social media platform must make the required disclosure easily accessible on the social media platform’s internet website and mobile application. The term “social media platform” does not include electronic mail. Instead, the term means “an internet-based service through which users develop a persistent virtual network or community comprised of other users for the purpose of sharing information, ideas, news reports, and other content that allows individuals to do all of the following:

  • Construct a public or semipublic profile within a bounded system created by the service.
  • Create a list of other users with whom an individual shares a connection within the system.
  • View and navigate a list of the individual’s connections and the connections made by other individuals within the system.”

Finally, a civil penalty of $1,000 per day for each day a violation occurs. In addition, if an action is brough by the Attorney General, then half of the penalty collected is to paid to the county treasurer in which the judgment was entered and the other to the State Treasurer.

AB 35 will be considered by its first policy committee in March 2021.

Spread the news:

 RELATED ARTICLES

13 thoughts on “AB 35: Disclosure of Social Media and False Info

  1. We can be punished by what we know to be the truth and that truth may not agree with those in charge of determining that truth and what they believe to be the truth (ie. Hunter Biden story) . This is totalitarian at its roots. God help us if this is ever enacted.

  2. Our esteemed bosses might ought’ta read the basic law relevant to their crime:

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

  3. The Great Reset cannot withstand the Great Awakening.
    Only Authoritarian Sources of Info Allowed? Only Statist Approved Speech?
    They Know they Cannot withstand Truth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *