Back in October, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex traveled to New York to participate and co-host events around World Mental Health Day. Archewell and Project Healthy Minds did an inaugural forum about internet safety and youth mental health, and the event was moderated by Carson Daly. The Sussexes were also joined by Dr. Vivek Murthy, the US surgeon general, and Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff. Some of the discussion featured personal stories from parents who lost children because of internet bullying. Well, this week, the Senate Judiciary Committee had a hearing on online child safety, and Harry and Meghan issued a statement about it:
Today, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a bi-partisan hearing on online child safety in front of a packed room including dozens of parents whose children have suffered or died due to online harms. The Archewell Foundation has been working with many of these families to provide a support network for parents dealing with grief or who have children managing serious mental health conditions as a result of their exposure to harmful online content.
Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, and co-founders of The Archewell Foundation said:
“We applaud the bravery and determination of the thousands of parents around the country whose advocacy resulted in this hearing.
Over the past few years, we have spent time with many of these families, listening to their heartache and their hopes for the urgent change that is needed in the online space. This is an issue that transcends division and party lines, as we saw today at the Senate hearing. The best parenting in the world cannot keep children safe from these platforms. As one of the fathers shared with us: ‘If love could have saved them, all of our children would still be here.’
This is not the time to pass the buck of responsibility. It’s the time to make necessary change at the source to keep our children safe.”
I’m glad that the Sussexes are drawing attention to the hearing, because it wasn’t even on my radar and I doubt I’m alone there. There needs to be more oversight and additional mechanisms to deplatform people who actively seek to harm people (specifically children) online. That being said, it feels like it keeps getting worse and worse, especially with these social media companies being owned by some of the worst people in the world.
Photos courtesy of Instagram, Getty.
Always proud to see how the Sussexes are living a purpose driven life, focusing on issues of the most importance.
I saw some of that hearing and watching Josh Hawley grandstanding is just a reminder of the hypocrisy of the MAGA republicans.
Wasn’t that something, Girl_Ninja? And he was not the only one. Lindsay Graham telling Mark Zuckerberg he has blood on his hands was my personal favorite for Hypocrite of the Year award.
I was truly waiting for a lightning bolt to hit him. Either that or John McCain crawling out of the grave and slapping him.
The headlines were “Mark Zuckerberg apologizes to the families.” The video then was Josh Hawley basically forcing Zuckerberg to turn around and apologize to these poor parents. It was awkward and basically meaningless-and it was taken that way by the families too.
Last year I was in a meeting with key Hill staffers about issues related to privacy and safety online and it was quite clear Republicans and Democrats are so far apart on this issue, nothing is going to happen. Despite all the grandstanding yesterday, Republicans are the ones opposed to regulation of any kind.
This 👆! The Republican outrage yesterday was strictly performative.
I’m not surprised. The “show” they put on yesterday is just as usefull as the continued “thoughts and prayers” after every school shooting, while they do nothing about it.
I’m not from the US, are politicians there obligated to inform the public about their donors? Are politicians obligated to inform about stocks they own? It would be interesting to know how many of these politicians owns stocks in the various SM companies.
@Couch Potato – Campaign finance rules are an unholy mess that I’m not even sure the people who wrote the laws fully understand. But essentially, you have to dig deep to find out who is financing who. And sometimes you still can’t come up with much. It’s not transparent at all. As for obligations to inform about stocks… LOL no. I’m sure they all own stocks in various terrible corporations, including social media.
@Lynn, that’s probably on purpose.
Good for them I’m happy they are speaking up about this and doing whatever they can. They have been talking about this particular subject for a while know.
I am always amazed at how articulate and well spoken Meghan is. You listen to some of the Royals taking it like listen to voice of the teacher on the Charlie Brown cartoons. Of course all the haters are making derogatory commentss on the Daily Mail. The British press and most of the readers are a joke. Even the Jamaican Prime Minister has commented on it.
Please don’t refer to a Black woman as “articulate and well spoken.” It’s among the most common micro aggressions.
I don’t think Kay meant it this way although I understand given the history that this would sting. Meghan is incredibly articulate, bright and well spoken compared to anyone – ANYONE. That’s why she’s amazing and it’s so striking.
p.s. I couldn’t believe how intelligent Meghan was the first time I saw anything of her which was at that forum she and Harry did with Kate and Wills. At the time I thought she was white and I was floored that someone in the royal family would be so insightful and bold. She made Will and Kate look like stammering incompetents. I have children who are of color and very obviously African American so when I found out she was black I was so so so excited for our daughters. Now my daughters dislike the BRF even more than I do.
I am sorry if you I was being racist in anyway towards Meghan. I just find her refreshing when hearing her speak compared to other Royals. I always thought she was a bright shining star within the Royal family. Britains loss.
Anyone, no matter if they’re black or white, woman or man, can be articulate and well spoken; it highlights their talent in expressing issues in the most descriptive and eloquent way, which Meghan has in abundance. Conversely, Kate’s basically unintelligible when she speaks and can’t articulate the difference between taste and smell.
Could anyone explain me why is this phrase racist or microagressive? I find myself googling and googling these terms, but without the cultural background I really don’t see the shade. Another example: in our country (Hungary) there are basically no black (or brown) people. Once my daughter (3) and I saw an amazingly beautiful black girl (those mile long-legs and wonderful skin) on the tram. My daughter instantly found her very pretty and we discussed it, that there are different skin colors, different hair structures etc. Is it rude or disrespectful to express that I found her beautiful (and exotic)? I don’t want to teach my daughter bad or racist language, but I don’t get it, why certain terms (meant totally neutral or just observant) sound offensive to others. I hope I could phrase my point/question well… 🙂
“especially with these social media companies being owned by some of the worst people in the world.”
AND they don’t allow THEIR KIDS ANYWHERE NEAR TECHNOLOGY!!!
Zuck has his kids growing macadamia trees to feed to cattle on his giant ranch-to-table plantation/Bunker in Hawaii. The Google kids, the apple kids… All the silicon valley bigwigs are doing the back to nature free range kid thing.
Their kids read paper books, attend classes with real teachers, build cardboard sets and perform in real live plays, they garden to grow things … Heck they probably write homework with quills.
They build this bullshit for the poors.
The metaverse is for when the real world is a scarce good; AI is for when human doctors, teachers, lawyers are available only to the rich.
This is so true. I work in tech and so many parents in this field keep their kids far, far away from social media because they know how damaging it is. I worked for a consulting firm that worked with many of these companies and I saw so much from the inside that I shut down all my personal social media except Instagram (I just can’t quit that one), stopped posting my kids, and won’t let them near it until they are way older. I do teach my kids (6 and 4) media literacy and basic navigation of tech because you can’t avoid it completely but I will do as much as I can to keep them away from it as long as I will be able to.
I have friends with older kids and the drama and harm I hear stemming from social media is awful and heartbreaking. These guys know exactly what they are doing with these products and it needs to be reined in.
While I hadn’t heard about the Sussexes’ statement, I did read an article about the hearing yesterday. It seems to be one of the few issues both political parties agree must be fixed but remain divided as to how. I loved how Congress absolutely grilled the SM CEOs and asked Mark Zuckerberg if he would apologize and he gave a half a**ed apology to those affected. One Congressperson (I forgot which one), after a CEO gave a nonsensical and noncommittal answer on whether his company would resolve the issue, said “so your answer is no”. That response was too funny and Congress is obviously fed up with these SM companies. They stated these companies could easily resolve this but won’t bc they continue targeting our children. I don’t know if anything will done anytime soon bc Congress wants these companies to fix their own mess despite this not being the first time they’ve had hearings about this issues. The Repubs won’t even protect our kids from gun violence so….
I got chills watching their video. They’ve given a platform to those parents, they’re spending real time with them and working to use their influence for a cause that affects so many. Beautiful.
I watched most of the hearing & found it really interesting. It was a rare show of bipartisanship & almost all of the Senators seemed very well prepared to shut down the stone-walling of the social media CEOs. There was grandstanding, but on the whole, there did seem to be some consensus, especially about ensuring that families can pursue remedies through the courts. So I’m optimistic that these companies might finally face some regulation.
I appreciate Harry & Meghan working with the families. There were so many heartbreaking stories in that room.
Like you I watched most of the hearing. I notice today that headlines are featuring Lindsay Graham saying “you have blood on your hands” and Josh Hawley grandstanding, and that’s disappointing. At least the senators had rare moments of bipartisanship on the issue. Amy Klobuchar is especially dedicated to this issue and has spent years working on legislation to protect children on the internet. I loved how she cut those execs off when they were blathering with no sincerity. She had no patience or time for them.
People like Elon Musk keep buying social media platforms so they can platform awful content that aligns with their politics. Unfortunately it turns platforms like Twitter/X into a cess pool. I’m glad politicians and organizations like the Archewell Foundation are working to make our digital spaces healthier.
BTW they buy up our media as well which is why we have the “media silos” now.
I’m glad they’re spotlighting this and hopefully drawing attention to the hearings for those who weren’t aware. Joshua hawley is a performative bully.
The Sussexes mean well, and this is such a crucial issue, but having soulless conmen like Josh Hawley and Lindsay Graham grandstanding all over this should a giant red flag here.
This is not the way. This just another example of republicans using “we must protect our children!” to actually mean “they can’t read books with nonwhite or nonstraight people in them!” Why on earth would we allow these same people to pick and choose what “safe” means on the internet?
Using the families of victims to manipulate support should be beyond the pale, but have we forgotten who we’re dealing with? The completely illegal social media microtargeting led by Cambridge Analytica that directly led to Trump and the continued brainwashing of large swaths of the public? That the republicans have been aiding and abetting since 20-freaking-15? And now those same exact republicans are standing up and saying hey, someone has to do something, we must control what’s happening online, and we’re all cheering them on? Do we not see where they’re going with this?
We have to be smarter than this, we just have to.
Bingo
Ok, that was the cold water in the face I needed. Excellent points.
Excellent statement. I saw Tom Cotton asking the CEO of Tiktok if he was a member of the CCP. These politicians are useless.
More than useless, they are stupid beyond any imagination.
I mean, after TC was told that TikTok’s CEO is from Singapore, he asked *again*, several times, about Shou Zi Chew’s possible ties to China.
How blindingly unintelligent can these people be, and, what’s worse, TC didn’t even feel any kind of shame about it.
That was such a blatant display of racism … as if all Asians come from the some country. It was embarrassing and infuriating.
I love when the Sussexes do it first. Anyway the BM Rats wanted them to make a statement so here it is.
Eh…God, it’s such a weak statement, especially if you know what’s up right now. Right now, there is a MASSIVE bill called the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) winding its way through Congress. It is the single largest attempt at social media regulation in decades. And it’s a crappy bill. It will basically allow the government a back door to SM censorship, especially as it applies to queer, trans, and other content conservatives do not like (Marsha Blackburn has said as much).
It sort of beggars belief at this point that you could make an educated statement on online safety, particularly as it applies to minors, and NOT have some kind of position on KOSA. I wonder why they avoid any mention of it – do they not know about it? Do they simply not want to address a highly controversial bill and risk alienating anybody? Maybe, but this statement gives nothing; they would have been better off saying nothing, I tend to believe.
I see Miranda Kerr’s husband, Evan Spiegel, was there. The irony is she’s stated that her kids will not be downloading the app anytime soon and they strictly limit TV screentime. Snapchat is one of the most egregious offenders and the Child Rescue Coalition has recently posted this exposé about it:
– Disappearing Messages: Snapchat’s feature of disappearing messages can make it easier for predators to groom and exploit children without leaving a trace. The fact that messages, photos, and videos disappear after a short period of time can encourage risky behavior – and make it harder for parents or authorities to detect and intervene in cases of abuse.
– Sexting: Snapchat has been associated with an increase in sexting among young people. According to a study by the Cyberbullying Research Center, 22% of teens surveyed reported sending nude or semi-nude photos or videos of themselves via Snapchat.
– Strangers: The app’s “Quick Add” feature, which suggests friends of friends, can expose children to strangers. There have been reports of predators using this feature to add and communicate with minors.
– Geolocation: Snapchat’s Snap Map feature can reveal a user’s precise location to friends or even strangers if the user has not set the appropriate privacy settings. This can put children at risk of physical harm, stalking, or cyberbullying.
– Inappropriate Content: Snapchat has been known to feature explicit content, and users can easily access inappropriate content through Snap Map or by following certain accounts. This can expose children to harmful or explicit material.
Miranda must be so proud of her husband (edit: so proud of his money).
I’ve also been seeing reports on this hearing on my SM feeds. It’s heartbreaking to hear the stories of families whose children died because SM outlets are not doing a better job in protecting children as it should. And at least this subject gets support from both political parties(which agree above, it’s rare to have both parties United on this front). Imo this also hits close to home to HM, as their own children has been subject to brutal online harassment and abuse by psycho derangers all these years.
We need a kids internet at this point, but I dunno, I’m going be eyeing the results of this panel warily over the next year. A lot of times “protect the kids” means taking adult dominated spaces and desexualizing/sanitizing them without addressing online bullying, corporatized gaming, misinformation, or harmful algorithms that are actually doing the bulk of messing these kids up. (And we all know what minority groups get hit hardest by the former.) I’d like to see some movement on it, but unless real experts get to have a say, I’m not sure changes needed will be made.