Key Points
- California’s AB 56 proposes warning labels on social media platforms to disclose mental health risks.
- The bill draws inspiration from prior laws requiring disclosure of cyberbullying and violent content policies.
- U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy supports warning labels, comparing them to warnings about tobacco products.
- California’s legal framework may make this proposal more feasible than broader measures like Texas’s blocked law.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan have introduced AB 56, a bill mandating social media platforms include warning labels highlighting their potential mental health risks. The proposal stems from concerns over platforms’ use of addictive features and harmful content to drive profits, and Bonta emphasizes the public’s right to understand the impact of these platforms on mental well-being.
While the bill does not specify the format or content of these warning labels, it points to the Cyberbullying Protection Act and the Online Violence Prevention Act as precedents. These acts required platforms to disclose cyberbullying reporting features and their mechanisms for addressing violent content.
This initiative aligns with a broader push for greater transparency and accountability in social media’s impact on mental health. An open letter signed by 42 attorneys general, including Bonta, recently urged Congress to adopt a surgeon general’s warning label for social media, an idea initially proposed by U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy. In a New York Times essay, Murthy highlighted the parallels between such warnings and those used for tobacco products, noting their potential to drive behavior change.
Murthy’s 2023 advisory on Social Media and Youth Mental Health revealed alarming statistics, including that adolescents spending over three hours daily on social media face double the risk of mental health issues. Although warning labels alone won’t solve the problem, they represent a tangible step toward addressing these risks.
California’s approach may prove more viable than broader attempts like Texas’s recently struck-down law to block harmful content for teens. Alongside mental health, online dangers such as mass surveillance, as flagged by the Federal Trade Commission, remain pressing concerns that demand attention.
