Proposed bill in Colorado would require age verification to access adult websites
Senate Bill 25-201
is designed to address rising concerns around children's access to explicit and harmful content on the internet. The bill would implement age verification measures for platforms hosting this content, offering a way to protect minors without stifling adult access.
Pornographic content is easily accessible by anyone with an internet connection. Research shows that
over half
of children aged 11 to 13 have encountered explicit content, often unintentionally.
This bill goes further than simply clicking "yes" or "no" when asked if a user is 18. It would require these platforms to verify that users are of legal age.
The process would focus on age, not identity, ensuring that users can prove their age without disclosing personal information. SB 25-201 mandates the use of certified age verification technologies that do not store or share personal data.
"The bill requires what we already require in the industry, which is to immediately delete any personal info used in that process," said Ian Corby with the Age Verification Providers Association. "There's even one solution where you just wave your fingers around, because this tendon ages differently, and they can figure out your age with 99% certainty."
Previous attempts to pass similar laws have faced legal challenges due to overreach, often threatening to restrict access to legal content. Sponsors of the bill said it avoids those pitfalls by targeting only the harmful content and applying age verification solely to users seeking access to adult materials.
Supporters said this bill underscores the importance of community responsibility while safeguarding the next generation. They also believe age checks would protect against the mental health consequences of early exposure, like social isolation, misconduct and depression.
Opponents also believe children shouldn't have access, but they said age verification violates adults.
Critics raised concerns about its potential to infringe on personal freedoms and privacy. They said that age verification technologies could lead to unintended consequences, such as data breaches or the circumvention of privacy rights. Some fear it also robs people of anonymity and threatens to bar individuals who either lack government ID or whose age is misidentified by the relevant technology.
Both sides agree there needs to be a balance between protecting children and respecting privacy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Tom's Guide
3 days ago
- Tom's Guide
An extra 5 million age checks a day are being completed thanks to the UK's Online Safety Act
New data suggests there has been an additional five million age verification checks every day in the UK since the introduction of the Online Safety Act. Sites hosting content deemed harmful for under 18s must now verify the age of visitors. But many see this as a significant privacy and cybersecurity risk – and have turned to the best VPNs in an attempt to bypass the checks. The Online Safety Act has triggered an important discussion about online privacy and there are strong views from both supporters and critics of the law. Those backing the law, including the UK government, have said it's doing a vital job at protecting children online. However, the law's opponents have said it comes with significant cybersecurity risks and compromises online privacy. One cybersecurity expert called it a "disaster waiting to happen." According to the Age Verification Providers Association (AVPA) there has been a significant increase in daily age verification checks online. As reported in the Guardian, the AVPA's Executive Director, Iain Corby said: "As a result of new codes under the Online Safety Act coming into force on Friday, we have seen an additional five million age checks on a daily basis, as UK-based internet users seek to access sites that are age-restricted." The AVPA said it couldn't share a baseline comparison to this figure, but some sites introduced age verification checks before the Online Safety Act became law. Reddit, X, and Spotify are just some of the sites you might have to verify your age to access all its content. But there have also been reports of overreach and content not traditionally seen as harmful being blocked. The UK government said "platforms should not arbitrarily block or remove content and instead must take a risk-based, proportionate approach to child safety duties." It went on to say "the act is not designed to censor political debate and does not require platforms to age gate any content other than those which present the most serious risks to children." However research by the BBC found that reports on the conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine have been blocked as a result of the Online Safety Act. There has been vocal opposition to the law and a petition demanding the UK government repeals the act is approaching 500,000 signatures. The UK government has said it wouldn't repeal the act, adding that it is "working closely with Ofcom to implement the Act as quickly and effectively as possible to enable UK users to benefit from its protections." "Proportionality is a core principle of the act and is in-built into its duties," the UK government said. "As regulator for the online safety regime, OFCOM must consider the size and risk level of different types and kinds of services when recommending steps providers can take to comply with requirements." MP Peter Kyle, Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, is one of the law's biggest supporters. He said the law "marks the most significant step forward in child safety since the internet was created" and that "age verification keeps children safe." However Kyle has also made controversial comments towards opponents of the law and in a tweet said you "are on the side of predators" if you wanted to overturn the Online Safety Act. The law has received support from an array of children's charities and YouGov research found that 69% of Britons are in favor of age verification checks. However, this is down from the 80% support recorded prior to the law's introduction and only 26% had encountered age checks online. Furthermore, 64% said it would be "not very / not at all effective" in preventing under 18s from accessing harmful content. Regardless of the positives, and the well intentioned nature of the law, there are fundamental privacy and cybersecurity concerns that need to be addressed. People don't feel comfortable handing over sensitive personal information to third-party age check providers such as AgeGO, Persona, and Yoti. Each provider has a different approach to data security, with some deleting it straight away and others holding it for some period of time. Any data being stored is at risk of a breach and the impact of one could be catastrophic. The recent Tea app breach exposed the ID of thousands of women in the US – an age verification provider breach could be even worse. Major VPN providers surged up the UK Apple App Store charts as people looked for ways to avoid age verification checks. Suspect free VPNs also rose in popularity and put people's data at risk in different ways. These privacy and cybersecurity concerns must be appropriately addressed, and not cast aside, should the UK government want the Online Safety Act to succeed in the best way it can. We test and review VPN services in the context of legal recreational uses. For example: 1. Accessing a service from another country (subject to the terms and conditions of that service). 2. Protecting your online security and strengthening your online privacy when abroad. We do not support or condone the illegal or malicious use of VPN services. Consuming pirated content that is paid-for is neither endorsed nor approved by Future Publishing.
The Hill
29-06-2025
- The Hill
A new Texas law could have wider effect on how food products are made, experts suggest
(NEXSTAR) – A new law in Texas could have a significant influence over how foods are presented — or even manufactured — in the rest of the country. Texas Gov. Gregg Abbott signed into law hundreds of bills last week, including one concerning a requirement for food manufacturers to disclose the use of any of 44 food additives through a 'prominent and reasonably visible' label on the packaging. These additives include artificial dyes, certain enzymes, molecularly altered oils, and additives banned in other countries, among other ingredients. 'WARNING: This product contains an ingredient that is not recommended for human consumption by the appropriate authority in Australia, Canada, the European Union, or the United Kingdom,' the label would read, according to the language of SB 25. The bill had previously passed through the Texas legislature as part of a 'Make Texas Healthy Again' initiative. But it may very well have implications far outside of Texas, if food manufacturers end up deciding to label or revamp their products for the market as a whole, according to Jennifer L. Falbe, an associate professor of Nutrition and Human Development at UC Davis. 'It is encouraging to see bipartisan support for food industry reform,' Falbe, who recently co-authored a study on the effectiveness of front-of-package labels, told Nexstar. 'Policies in a large state like Texas can have ramifications for the rest of the country.' Speaking with the Washington Post, Scott Faber of the Environmental Working Group said there was 'no question' that such a law would influence how food companies do business in the rest of the U.S. 'When a state as big as Texas requires a warning, that will have an impact on the entire marketplace,' he told the outlet. Even still, it may take years to learn how the new law ends up influencing how food companies label or manufacture their products in Texas and beyond. According to the language of the bill, the warning labels would only apply to 'a food product label developed or copyrighted on or after January 1, 2027.' As noted by Stat, the entire requirement could also be moot if the federal government introduces its own legislation regarding food labeling before 2027. There's also another potential problem with the law: The language surrounding the additives may be inaccurate. A review cited by the Associated Press found that almost a dozen of the 44 additives listed are in fact allowed in some of the foreign regions where the label required by the Texas law claims they're not, while several are allowed in all of them. And others, like Red Dye No. 4, are already banned in the U.S. 'I don't know how the list of chemicals was constructed,' Thomas Galligan, a scientist with the Center for Science in the Public Interest, told the Associated Press. 'Warnings have to be accurate in order to be legal.' Falbe says the warning also does little to deter food manufacturers from limiting sodium or sugar, even if they end up removing any offending additives from the ingredients list. 'To the extent that sugary and salty products also contain the additives in the Texas law, the warning could drive healthier choices in the near term. But they may also incentivize food companies to replace a limited set of additives to avoid labeling, without fundamentally improving the quality of foods and beverages,' says Falbe. 'For example, a sugary soda that has a coloring agent replaced with another is still a soda — it is still going to increase disease risk. Same with a sugary cereal or a salty soup.' Falbe's study, published this month, indicates that consumers would more accurately assess the nutrition profile of a given food if it had clearer front-of-package labeling highlighting the saturated fat, sodium and added sugar content. And that's also what she believes the federal government should be pushing food manufacturers to include. 'Front-of-package warning labels indicating high amounts of added sugars, sodium, and saturated fat increase consumer knowledge, help people make healthier choices, and nudge the food industry to make healthier products,' Falbe said.
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Yahoo
St. George school system amendment bill headed to Louisiana Senate
BATON ROUGE, La. (Louisiana First) — A school district is one step closer to becoming a reality in St. George after the Louisiana House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday, June 9. The bill now heads to the Louisiana Senate, where if approved, the public will then have a say during the statewide election on April 18, 2026. SB 25 and SB 234 were both authored by Sen. Rick Edmonds and co-authored by State Representative Emily Chenevert. They aim to create a community school system in St. George, as well as provide details on how it would work. Former Baton Rouge mayor criticizes current administration in social media video Lafayette Regional Airport lockdown lifted, no explosives found House GOP effort to lock in DOGE cuts faces Republican resistance St. George school system amendment bill headed to Louisiana Senate Federal minimum wage would rise to $15 under Sen. Hawley bill California Republican pushes back against Trump immigration enforcement Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
