In a groundbreaking shift that could reshape how social media operates in Latin America, Brazil’s Supreme Court is poised to make tech platforms like Meta, X (formerly Twitter), and Microsoft legally responsible for what users post on their platforms.

The ruling, which is still in progress, already has support from a majority of the court’s 11 justices — enough to effectively pass. Once finalized and published, it will mark a significant departure from the current legal framework and bring Brazil’s tech regulation closer to that of the European Union.

Why This Matters

The move comes amid growing concerns over illegal and harmful content circulating online — from child exploitation and violent content to the spread of misinformation and political extremism. Justice Gilmar Mendes cast the sixth and deciding vote on Wednesday, opening the door for users and victims to sue social media platforms and demand compensation for harmful content posted by others.

Supporters of the measure argue that platforms must take greater responsibility for moderating what’s shared. But critics warn the ruling could severely chill free speech and disproportionately impact smaller companies that don’t have the legal resources to comply.

A Divided Court — and a Divisive Issue

Justice Flávio Dino, who initiated Wednesday’s votes, cited disturbing examples of how violent content spreads unchecked online — including posts celebrating school shootings. “Social media hasn’t brought out the best in humanity,” Dino remarked grimly.

On the other side, Justice André Mendonça — the lone dissenter so far — warned that holding platforms directly accountable could suppress critical voices. “Freedom of expression on social media is essential for holding powerful institutions to account — including governments, political elites, and the platforms themselves,” Mendonça wrote in his opinion.

Legal Context and Political Tensions

Under Brazil’s current law, platforms are only liable for content if they fail to remove it after receiving a court order. This new ruling would change that, placing the burden on companies to act before a judge intervenes.

This legal pivot comes at a tense moment in Brazil–U.S. relations. American officials — including Secretary of State Marco Rubio — have floated possible visa restrictions for foreign authorities accused of censoring U.S. citizens. One of the figures reportedly under scrutiny is Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, known for pressuring platforms to follow Brazil’s digital regulations.

Fallout and Unanswered Questions

Even if this ruling becomes law, Brazil’s Congress could still pass legislation to override it. Meanwhile, the court has yet to outline exactly how the new standard of liability will be implemented.

Alvaro Palma de Jorge, a legal scholar at the Getulio Vargas Foundation in Rio, said platforms must be proactive: “They can’t just wait for a court order anymore. They need to adopt safeguards to prevent harm before it happens.”

But not everyone is on board.

The Brazilian Chamber of Digital Economy, which represents tech companies and startups, warned that this decision could stifle competition. “Big companies can absorb the legal costs. Small, national platforms can’t,” the organization said in a statement, adding that the move may “raise barriers to innovation and limit user freedom.”

A Step Toward EU-Style Regulation?

Brazil’s approach now closely mirrors the European Union’s efforts to rein in the influence of big tech through strict digital accountability laws. Whether this model can work in Brazil — a country with a large, polarized online population and intense political debate — remains to be seen.

For now, though, the message is clear: Brazil is no longer willing to let social media platforms take a hands-off approach to harmful content.

Source: AP News – Brazil’s Supreme Court justices agree to make social media companies liable for user content

The post Brazil’s Top Court Votes to Hold Social Media Platforms Liable for User Posts appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Austin, TX — A high-profile effort to ban social media accounts for minors under 18 in Texas appears to be fading fast, with the state legislature running out of time to act before the session ends Monday.

The bill, which had already cleared the GOP-led Texas House, would have created one of the toughest restrictions in the country—barring anyone under 18 from joining platforms like TikTok, Snapchat, and Instagram. But momentum in the state Senate slowed just as lawmakers approached a critical weekend deadline.

“This bill was the best way to protect children in this state,” said Republican state Rep. Jared Patterson, who championed the legislation. Still, without a final Senate vote, the proposal is unlikely to reach Gov. Greg Abbott’s desk in time.

Abbott has not publicly taken a position on the bill, though earlier this week he signed a separate measure into law requiring app stores like Apple’s and Google’s to verify users’ ages. That law also mandates parental consent for anyone under 18 to download apps or make in-app purchases. Utah passed a similar law earlier this year, though it’s currently tied up in court.

The Bigger Picture: Growing National and Global Push

Texas’s proposal goes further than Florida’s recent ban on social media accounts for kids under 14, and echoes moves in places like Australia, where users must be at least 16. These initiatives are part of a growing bipartisan push to tackle the mental health risks and addictive nature of social media for younger users.

Critics of the platforms argue that companies design their apps to keep kids online longer, often exposing them to violent, inappropriate, or abusive content. Supporters of the Texas bill said it was a necessary step to give children a healthier digital environment.

However, the proposal faced strong opposition from tech trade groups and free speech advocates, who argue such bans are unconstitutional and overly broad.

Teen Usage Remains Sky-High Despite Risks

A December 2024 Pew Research Center report found that nearly half of American teenagers describe themselves as being online “constantly.” This, despite growing concerns from researchers and parents alike about the toll social media and smartphones take on mental health.

The American Psychological Association has been vocal in urging lawmakers and tech companies to do more. They say social media platforms are particularly harmful to young users who struggle to disengage or control their usage.

Legal Hurdles and Uncertain Future

Even if Texas had passed the bill, it likely would have faced immediate legal challenges—just like Utah’s law, which a federal judge temporarily blocked in 2024.

Meanwhile, California is taking a different approach. Starting in 2027, it will be illegal for platforms to knowingly serve addictive algorithm-driven content to minors without parental consent. And in New York, a new law allows parents to prevent platforms from pushing algorithm-generated content to their children entirely.

As more states and countries take action, the broader debate continues: How can society protect kids from the harms of social media without infringing on free speech or digital access?

For now, Texas’s bold attempt is on pause—but the conversation is far from over.

Source: AP News – Texas push to ban minors under 18 from social media fades with time running out

The post Push to Keep Kids Off Social Media Fades in Texas Legislature appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

SKOPJE, North Macedonia — A political party in North Macedonia is urging the government to take action against social media platforms that promote harmful content, following a surge in injuries linked to the viral “Superman challenge” on TikTok.

The challenge, which encourages young people to throw themselves into the air to mimic superhero stunts, has resulted in at least 17 students, ages 10 to 17, being hospitalized with serious injuries in recent days. These injuries, including broken bones, bruises, and contusions, occurred as children attempted the stunt for internet attention.

The Liberal-Democratic Party, which was part of the country’s left-leaning coalition government until early 2024, issued a statement on Saturday condemning the spread of such dangerous content on social media. The party specifically highlighted the “Superman challenge” on TikTok, which has led to injuries in at least six children across North Macedonia in just 24 hours.

The party criticized the lack of proper regulation on social media platforms, arguing that this allowed dangerous trends to reach vulnerable users, especially minors. They are calling for immediate measures to ban content that promotes violence and self-destructive behavior, increase oversight of social media, and impose sanctions on platforms that enable these trends.

Concerns Over Youth Behavior and Social Media Influence

Vesna Janevska, North Macedonia’s education minister, emphasized that students should focus on their education, not risky social media challenges. While acknowledging the limited impact of mobile phone bans in schools, she pointed out that children still have access to these platforms at home and in their communities.

Psychologists have raised alarms over the increasing influence of social media, warning that children are becoming more inclined to engage in dangerous behaviors to fit in with online trends. They are urging parents and educators to talk openly with students about the risks associated with excessive phone use and social media participation.

The growing concern over these “challenges” calls for more responsible management of online platforms, especially as the influence of social media continues to shape youth behavior.

Source

The post North Macedonia Calls for Ban on Dangerous Social Media Challenges After Student Injuries appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

When President-elect Donald Trump announced that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy would spearhead efforts to downsize the federal government, many public employees feared their jobs could be in jeopardy. Now, their concerns have deepened as Musk publicly names government workers, turning them into targets for online harassment.

Government Employees Under Fire

Recently, Musk reposted messages on his social platform, X, revealing the names and roles of individuals holding four relatively obscure climate-related government positions. These posts, viewed tens of millions of times, have led to an onslaught of negative attention and harassment for those named. At least one of the targeted employees has since deleted her social media accounts.

Although the information Musk shared is publicly accessible, the targeted individuals are low-profile civil servants whose roles don’t involve direct public engagement. Federal employees fear these actions could result in permanent personal and professional harm, including physical threats.

“This tactic sows fear among federal employees,” said Everett Kelley, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents over 800,000 civilian workers. “It’s designed to intimidate and silence them.”

A Pattern of Intimidation

Musk has previously used his platform to criticize individuals, often resulting in significant personal backlash for those targeted. Mary “Missy” Cummings, a professor at George Mason University and a former senior advisor at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), experienced this firsthand. Musk criticized her publicly due to her comments on Tesla’s driver-assistance technology, leading to online harassment and even death threats. Cummings said she had to relocate temporarily due to safety concerns.

“He uses intimidation to pressure people to quit,” Cummings explained. “It’s a signal to others in government agencies: ‘You’re next.’”

The Climate-Related Jobs in Musk’s Crosshairs

Among those targeted were employees in climate-related roles at various government agencies:

• US International Development Finance Corporation (DFC): Musk reposted a message criticizing the role of a “Director of Climate Diversification,” calling such positions “fake jobs.” The DFC focuses on funding projects in low-income countries to address climate challenges. After Musk’s post, the targeted employee deactivated her social media accounts.
• Department of Energy (DOE): Musk called out the chief climate officer, whose role involves reducing barriers to clean energy adoption. Ironically, this office helped fund Tesla in its early days, awarding the company a $465 million loan in 2010.
• Department of Health and Human Services (HHS): A senior advisor on environmental justice and climate change faced criticism. The HHS focuses on mitigating pollution impacts on vulnerable communities, a role established during the Biden administration.
• Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): Musk mocked the salary of a climate advisor at HUD, adding laughing emojis to his post. The advisor’s work centers on addressing climate risks in housing.

Despite the backlash, the agencies involved declined to comment on individual employees or their positions.

Impact on Public Service

Federal employees say Musk’s actions discourage civil service and endanger individuals committed to public work. Some have already resigned out of fear of becoming the next target.

Experts on cyber harassment note that Musk’s tactics create a chilling effect, discouraging discussion and public accountability. However, they often hesitate to speak publicly, fearing Musk’s online influence.

Broader Debate on Bureaucracy

Ramaswamy, Musk’s collaborator in the proposed downsizing efforts, emphasized the problem is systemic, not personal. “Our opponent is the bureaucracy, not any individual,” he said, while acknowledging that most federal employees deserve respect.

Meanwhile, Musk has faced criticism for benefiting significantly from federal programs. The American Federation of Government Employees pointed out that contractors like Musk receive around $750 billion annually—far more than the $200 billion spent on the civilian federal workforce.

A Call to Action

Despite the risks, Cummings insists on speaking out. “Someone has to stand up to this,” she said. “I refuse to let him win on this point.”

As Musk continues to wield his platform against government employees, the line between public accountability and personal harassment grows ever blurrier, leaving federal workers to navigate an increasingly hostile environment.

Source

CNN Full Video

The post Elon Musk’s Posts Put Federal Workers in the Spotlight, Sparking Fear appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The rapid evolution of social media has transformed how young people connect, but it has also brought significant challenges, including cyberbullying and harmful online behavior. These issues are at the heart of Australia’s heated debate over proposed legislation to ban social media use for children under 16.

A Cyber Safety Expert’s Eye-Opening Experience

Kirra Pendergast, a cyber safety educator, has spent years educating teenagers about the risks of online behavior. However, a recent incident left her shocked and emotionally shaken. During a presentation at an Australian high school, a group of 12- and 13-year-old boys began shouting misogynistic slurs inspired by online influencers. Despite efforts from teachers to calm the students, the hostility escalated, culminating in an expletive-filled remark from a girl that drove Pendergast to leave the session in tears.

“This behavior is clearly driven by things they’ve seen online, and it has to change,” she said in a heartfelt video afterward.

Once an opponent of banning social media for children, Pendergast has shifted her stance. “Ban it. Just ban it,” she declared, citing her frustration with the toxic influence of social platforms on young minds.

Proposed Legislation: A Bold Move

The Australian government is pushing for a “world-leading” law that would prohibit children under 16 from accessing platforms like Snapchat, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter). If passed, social media companies that fail to enforce this ban could face fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($32 million).

The legislation proposes age verification measures to ensure compliance, though critics argue that such measures raise privacy concerns. The government has pledged to address these issues within the framework of the law.

A Growing Crisis: The Cost of Inaction

The urgency behind the legislation is underscored by tragic cases of young lives lost due to online bullying. Two 12-year-old girls, Charlotte O’Brien and Ella Catley-Crawford, took their own lives after being targeted on platforms like Snapchat. Their families have since become advocates for stricter age limits on social media, presenting a petition with over 124,000 signatures to raise the minimum age from 13 to 16.

Charlotte’s parents, Matthew Howard and Kelly O’Brien, described the devastating impact of online bullying. “No parent wants to go through what we’re going through,” Howard said, emphasizing the need for change.

Supporters and Critics of the Ban

Proponents of the ban argue that it could save lives and shield children from harm during formative years. Clinical psychologist Dr. Danielle Einstein supports the measure, noting that social media often replaces critical face-to-face interactions, limiting children’s ability to resolve conflicts and build meaningful relationships.

However, critics believe the legislation is a blunt tool that may drive children toward unregulated parts of the internet. A joint letter signed by more than 140 experts called the ban a rushed response that shifts responsibility away from tech companies to create safer platforms.

Amanda Third, co-director of the Young and Resilient Research Centre, opposes the ban, arguing that the current minimum age of 13 is appropriate for many children. She warns that the legislation is politically motivated, with upcoming federal elections and a media campaign by News Corp possibly influencing the push for stricter regulations.

Tech Industry Pushback

Tech companies have expressed concerns about the proposed ban. During a Senate hearing, Snap Inc., the parent company of Snapchat, reiterated its zero-tolerance policy for bullying, urging users to report and block offenders. Instagram, owned by Meta, launched an anti-bullying campaign to promote strategies for handling online harassment. However, these efforts have been criticized as insufficient by parents and advocates.

What’s at Stake?

The debate continues to polarize parents, educators, and policymakers. While some see the ban as a necessary step to protect children, others worry about its potential downsides, including privacy concerns and enforcement challenges.

Cyber safety educator Pendergast believes that even one life saved justifies the legislation. “Why would we deny a child that protection?” she asked. “The only ones losing while we argue are the kids.”

The proposed law has sparked a national conversation about the role of social media in children’s lives, the responsibilities of tech companies, and the broader societal impacts of digital platforms. As Australia moves toward a decision, the world will be watching to see how this bold experiment unfolds.

Source

The post Should Social Media Be Banned for Under-16s? Australia’s Bold Proposal Sparks Debate appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.