Sign in

Morgan Wilsmann

@mwils.bsky.social
397 followers 592 following 340 posts

Policy Analyst @ Public Knowledge Content Moderation, Platform Regulation, News Policy

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Morgan Wilsmann
Public Knowledge @publicknowledge.bsky.social · 28/09/2026
The disappointing outcome of the multiyear Google ad-tech antitrust case is the latest example of antitrust enforcement alone being insufficient to rein in Big Tech. It's time for a digital regulator, says Audrey Black in her latest blog post: publicknowledge.org/its-time-for...
publicknowledge.org
It's Time for a Digital Regulator
Public Knowledge promotes freedom of expression, an open internet, and access to affordable communications tools and creative works. We work to shape policy.
023
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
2) Invest in community infrastructure to provide more opportunities for offline community engagement & civic info. sharing. The mechanism is similar to one PK advocated for via the "Superfund for the Internet", which was more focused on directing funds to local journalism (among other things)
publicknowledge.org
A Superfund for the Internet Could Clean Up Our Polluted Information Ecosystem
Our increasingly polluted information environment — including the proliferation of “crazy lies and conspiracy theories” on social media —
001
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
There's lots of reasons why algorithms shouldn't be (and cant regulated) directly, but it's a head-in-the-sand belief that algos aren't at least partly to blame for causing compulsive use and harm. The idea behind this bill is to 1) disincentivize algo-driven engagement maximizing advertising &
100
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
Anyway, I think Politco, MS NOW, and CNN have a slam dunk case, so it's no surprise Judge Kelly ordered a reversal of the ban. Trump is clearly trying to control the narrative about him, which even his sycophants can admit is bad for press freedom and free speech.
000
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
White House claims citing anonymous sources on Iran war-related reporting was a clear national security threat But, incredibly, @status.news reported that one of the "anonymous sources" for Iran-related briefing was none other than VP JD Vance himself!
status.news
The Source Behind The Ban
The anonymous source behind one of the stories the White House cited to justify banning POLITICO was none other than Vice President JD Vance, Status has learned.
100
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
His lawyers no doubt told him he can't ban outlets because of their editorialization ("they're too negative about me!" isn't a reason to ban journalists), but he can restrict speech on national security grounds, which courts have historically given some deference to.
100
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
There's quite literally no way to frame this other than Trump retaliating against news outlets that do not report on him favorably. It's viewpoint discrimination, point blank.
100
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
Lots of Trump aligned folks claiming journalists have no right to being in the White House. But access isn't the issue here -- it's the taking away of access as punishment for disfavored speech. Trump was explicit about this -- he was banning these outlets bc he believes they're "fake news".
100
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 24/09/2026
Pretty amazing to me that one of the first moves from Trump II was an executive order "ending federal censorship", and in the ~20 months since, the admin tramples on 1A rights every chance it gets. What's also remarkable is how events like these expose the lack of understanding of 1A
114
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 16/09/2026
Cruz & Wyden's JAWBONE Act passed out of committee this morning, thanks to Dem support from @edmarkey.bsky.social @rosen.senate.gov @schatz.bsky.social - each of whom has spoken loudly against censorship coming out of FCC Chair Carr. A crucial step toward neutering Carr's censorship efforts!
011
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 14/09/2026
JAWBONE Act is finally scheduled for a markup. Nearly a year ago, PK's @haroldfeld.bsky.social told Sen. Cruz we'd support a law that clarifies when the bully pulpit crosses the line into unconstitutional coercion of speech and gives victims of censorship pathways to justice. & now its here!
012
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 09/09/2026
Local news policy may not be the top of many peoples' minds, but man is it important. Local news is so crucial for fighting corruption, mobilizing civic engagement, building community, holding leaders to account... This is a historic moment and Newsom's gotta sign this NEWS Act in to law!!!
0135
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
I guess I should thank Australia for being the lab rat for bad tech policy ideas. We've seen how their social media bans isn't really working. If the legislation becomes law, we'll see how a content-based duty of care will lead to state-mandated speech restrictions.
011
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
I mean, who decides what is "content that promotes hostile ideas about women and gender equality"? I can EASILY imagine a world where TERFs see trans women simply existing in their feeds as "hostile ideas about women".
110
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
Versions of the Kids Online Safety Act here in the U.S. tried the same idea - a duty of care to prevent certain objectionable but legal content from being fed to teen users. It got a lot of pushback - for good reason- and this Australian version should, too.
110
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 08/09/2026
Australia is drafting legislation requiring a 'Digital Duty of Care' that would give users choice over their social feeds - which is fine. The alarming bit is the requirement to "protect under-18s" (read: censor content from under-18s) from this list of legal content: www.pm.gov.au/media/my-fee...
They will also be required to protect under 18s from harmful content like: 

content that promotes, encourages or accelerates eating disorders
content that promotes hostile ideas about women and gender equality
pornography
content that glorifies crime or life endangering stunts
content that causes serious mental health distress, including abuse and bullying.
Australians will benefit from better protection from seriously harmful and illegal content across digital services, and social media users will be afforded more choice.
110
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 04/09/2026
cant say i'm surprised the google ad tech monopoly remedies are so lackluster!
000
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 01/09/2026
It also doesn't really settle the question of what design features fall outside of Section 230's orbit -- which, I think, is a consequential q to resolve, else lawmakers continue their endeavors to repeal Section 230 altogether and declare social media reined in, rights of users be damned
110
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 01/09/2026
Virtually no one is claiming this Meta settlement is a big win for platform accountability and online safety, but it's definitely not nothing. The most concerning part is how the settlement sidesteps any First Amendment questions about age assurance and regulating recommendation algorithms.
221
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 14/08/2026
Hopefully, this decision (+ Australia's challenges in implementing a similar law) stalls the global trend of social media bans (although Macron has already asked for a bill rewrite). Kids have expressive rights too! There are better, rights respective ways to mitigate online harm:
publicknowledge.org
The Kids Aren't Alright Online: How To Build a Safer, Better Internet for Everyone
This paper discusses the need for policymaking that prioritizes making the internet safer and privacy-protective for everyone and outlines how to get there.
010
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 14/08/2026
if you're gonna block kids from something, it should be from features known to be harmful - like stranger contacts and live location maps. Age assurance, if implemented, has to be used as a narrow tool - and even then, using least-invasive, most privacy preserving methods:
publicknowledge.org
From 'Should We?' to 'How?': A Framework for Getting Age Assurance Right
Public Knowledge promotes freedom of expression, an open internet, and access to affordable communications tools and creative works. We work to shape policy.
120
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 14/08/2026
The court also took issue with the ban not distinguishing between the riskiness of social media platform -- it just applied to all online services -- which is a totally blunt and rights-threatening approach
100
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 14/08/2026
Which is exactly what the French court said in its decision -- that every person, even an adult, will need to prove their age before accessing online services, infringing on freedom of expression.
100
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 14/08/2026
I can sympathize w/ those who support these bans -- parents and lawmakers and even the kids themselves feel helpless against the dominance social media has on attention. But what we're ultimately talking about is the gvmt installing a gate to pass in order to speak and be spoken to online
100
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 14/08/2026
Today, France's Constitutional Council struck down a bill that banned under-15s from accessing social media -- a pretty notable setback for Jonathan Haidt & his supporters' crusade to get the world to get kids off of social media
reuters.com
France's top court blocks social media ban for under-15s
France's top court on Friday blocked ​a bill banning social media access for ‌under-15s, saying it infringed upon freedom of expression, a setback for President Emmanuel Macron who asked his governmen...
111
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 11/08/2026
The people who built careers exposing the alleged 'censorship industrial complex' are now running the most aggressive government speech suppression operation. Shuttering USAID, defunding academics & researchers, harassing media watchdog groups... It's so expansive and so deeply hypocritical.
010
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
We'll see if the House and Senate can reconcile their pretty significant difference in their respective versions of KOSA.
010
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
KOSA was passed unanimously out of Committee, once again!
110
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
Regardless, both Cruz's CHATBOT Act and Markey's Youth AI Privacy Act are voted favorably out of committee on a voice vote
010
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
The tension is whether parents are best suited to determine how much risk their child can face when using a chatbot, or whether AI chatbots should just be safe by default. Cruz believes the decision should lay with parents, Markey believes developers & deployers should be the ones responsible
120
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
Sen. Cruz introduces an amendment to Markey's YAP to give parents the ability to increase the chatbot history limit, which Markey does not support, pointing to harm to children users from unlimited or too-long memory limits
120
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
Looks like there weren't enough members in the room to vote SCREEN Act out of committee, but it would have probably been voted on party line anyway.
040
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
Sen. Cantwell in her opening statement point to the overwhelming support Senate version of KOSA has -- it currently has 76 cosponsors! And also signaled she cannot support SCREEN Act as its currently drafted.
110
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
From our age verification framework, AI chatbots pose medium risk, which should trigger platforms to use age signals that they can already read: account history, a self-declared age with behavioral confirmation, a verified parent vouching, or facial estimation w/ ability to appeal if inaccurate.
publicknowledge.org
Getting Age Assurance Right: A Risk-Based Framework for High-Risk Online Features
This paper by Public Knowledge Government Affairs Director Sara Collins describes three policy failures jeopardizing the safety of America’s children online and proposes a risk-tiered framework to hel...
120
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
We endorsed Sen. Markey's Youth AI Privacy Act because it regulates chatbot design rather than chatbot access. Yes, its constructive knowledge standard means platforms will need some sense of which users are minors. That is not the same thing as an ID mandate.
120
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
Finally, Markey's Youth AI Privacy bill, which puts the burden on the companies building AI chatbots: no addictive features like push alerts aimed at minors, no targeted ads, no training on kids' conversations, and a private right of action for parents. @publicknowledge.bsky.social endorsed this one
131
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
Also - a known minor's account is deleted if it is not connected to a family account, effectively acting as a chatbot ban for children and teens (unless you let your parents surveil you!).
publicknowledge.org
Congress Should Regulate AI Chatbots, But Not Who Can Use Them
Tragic cases of youth suicides following long periods of interaction with AI chatbots online have inspired a flurry of bills to prevent further deaths.
120
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
Sen. Cruz's CHATBOT bill would require minor users to have a family account and parental consent in order to access a chatbot. Maybe appropriate for under 13s, but requiring AI chatbots to give parents the ability to monitor their 17 y.o's chatbot logs feels a step too far.
120
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
Meanwhile, Senate's KOSA still includes Duty of Care language that could encourage platforms to suppress any and all potentially objectionable content as to avoid regulatory or legal scrutiny -- despite how much Sen. Blackburn asserts its about harmful design features
120
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton upheld a Texas age verification law on the premise that only speech unprotected as to minors was being gated. Senate's Screen act locks minors out of a whole platform, blocking access to speech minors have a right to access.
131
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
SCREEN Act & KOSA were both in House-passed KIDS Act omnibus, but Senate versions are more expansive in the content it scopes as harmful to minors. On SCREEN, the Senate text drops any threshold for how much of a site is adult content and requires platforms to keep minors off the service entirely.
131
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 05/08/2026
We have a markup of a handful of kids online safety bills in Senate Commerce committee this morning. Out of the dozens of bills Chair Cruz could select, he chose: SCREEN Act (age verification for adult sites), Sen. Blackburn's KOSA, Markey's Youth AI Privacy Act, and Cruz's CHATBOT Act
commerce.senate.gov
Executive Session 24 - U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation
353
Reposted by Morgan Wilsmann
Public Knowledge @publicknowledge.bsky.social · 23/07/2026
Congress agrees AI chatbots need guardrails for kids — but they very much do not agree on how. Policy Analyst @mwils.bsky.social breaks down why @markey.senate.gov's Youth AI Privacy Act is the right model:
041
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 11/06/2026
Gvmt jawboning has only gotten worse and worse - notably coming from FCC Chair Carr's "easy way or the hard way" threats, or from DOJ's forced takedown of Facebook ICE watch group, and dozens of other examples. JAWBONE Act bolsters 1A rights by giving a way to hold gov. censors accountable
010
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 19/05/2026
Senator Hawley's GUARD Act age gates AI Companions but 1) the way companions are defined could sweep up most AI Chat bots and 2) does nothing to make AI companies design products with safety at the forefront. Fortunately, there are two far better options in the Senate. Read about it!
030
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 15/05/2026
CRINGE
010
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 12/05/2026
@publicknowledge.bsky.social new white paper proposes a framework that classifies features by actual harm potential, bans government ID as a required verification method, and closes the loophole that lets platforms use age data commercially while claiming ignorance of user ages for safety purposes.
020
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 12/05/2026
Momentum for age verification laws at the state, federal, and international level is high and not going away. Age gating is bad for the open internet and free expression, but if it has to be done, we have do it in targeted, privacy and expression preserving ways. Here's how to do it right:
publicknowledge.org
From 'Should We?' to 'How?': A Framework for Getting Age Assurance Right
Public Knowledge promotes freedom of expression, an open internet, and access to affordable communications tools and creative works. We work to shape policy.
120
Reposted by Morgan Wilsmann
The Verge @theverge.com · 28/04/2026
Former FCC officials want to force a vote on the ‘weapon’ Brendan Carr has invoked against broadcasters
buff.ly
Former FCC officials want to force a vote on the ‘weapon’ Brendan Carr has invoked against broadcasters
The bipartisan group says it’s been “weaponized for partisan purposes.”
23912
Morgan Wilsmann @mwils.bsky.social · 28/04/2026
Many of the claims in these social media addiction trials should be thrown out on S230 grounds…. But not everything. I make that distinction here, knowing well there will be some disagreement on where we draw the line b.w feature & content!
010