highbeamSubscribe

Policy brief 04 · Kids + Social Media

Algorithm Opt-Out

Let everyone opt out; default children to their friends.

All policy briefs

Americans now spend 7% of their Instagram time on posts from friends; most of the rest goes to short videos from strangers, picked by AI.1 Families who want a feed of the people their children actually follow have no reliable way to keep one. Congress should give every user a chronological feed that sticks, make it the default for minors unless a parent opts in, and audit the difference.

The Problem

Facebook and Instagram once "primarily showed content from users' friends," as a federal judge put it in 2025.1 When Instagram began ranking its feed in 2016, it told users that "all the posts will still be there, just in a different order."2 Nine years later, the same court found that feeds "now mostly display unconnected content" from accounts users never followed.1

Ranking keeps people scrolling. In a 2020 experiment run with Meta, users moved to chronological feeds spent "dramatically less time" on Facebook and Instagram, and some of that time shifted to TikTok and YouTube.3 The ranked feed is worth a great deal to the platform. For a family, it has become the price of admission.

Three problems keep the ranked feed in charge:

  1. The right is European. EU law requires the largest platforms to offer, for each recommender system, at least one option "not based on profiling."4 Federal law is silent.
  2. The choice doesn't stick. Instagram's chronological "Following" feed reverts to the ranked feed whenever the app is closed and reopened, and its head guesses that uptake in Australia is in the "low single-digit percentages."5
  3. Kids get only an option. Meta's $17 billion settlement with 51 attorneys general in August 2026 gives users under 18 the option of a non-personalized feed.6 Yet as Instagram's head said in September 2026, "Anything that isn't the default just doesn't get used the majority of the time."5

Why legislation: The Senate Commerce Committee has reported the bipartisan Kids Off Social Media Act, led by Senators Schatz and Cruz, which bars personalized recommendations for users under 17 but permits a chronological feed of accounts they follow.7 New York will require parental consent for personalized feeds starting in January 2027,8 and the Ninth Circuit let California's similar rule take effect in 2025.9 No federal law guarantees Americans a feed free of behavioral ranking. Letting a child follow friends should not mean handing the evening to a recommendation engine.

The Solution

A four-step staircase: each step stands alone, and each step up moves the default from the platform toward the person. Scope: social and video platforms above 10 million monthly U.S. users; the rules cover feeds and recommendation surfaces, not search results a user asks for.

Step 1 — Offer a real chronological feed. Every user can choose a feed of the accounts they follow, newest first, with no ranking by behavioral data. KOSA's introduced text would give every user a similar switch to a feed shaped only by what they chose, such as the accounts they follow.10

Step 2 — Make the choice stick. The setting persists across sessions and devices until the user changes it, sits one tap from the home screen, and costs nothing: no lost features, repeated prompts, or fees. A choice that resets every time the app opens is not a choice.

Step 3 — Default minors to their friends. For users under 18, the default feed shows only accounts they chose to follow, newest first. A verified parent may turn on personalization, and parent or child can turn it back off at any time. New York's law takes this approach in 2027;8 this makes it national and specific.

Step 4 — Audit the feeds. Platforms disclose the signals each feed uses, give the FTC access to verify that the default contains no behavioral ranking, and publish uptake and switching rates. Personalization is defined by what a system does, whatever the company calls it.

Where to start: Step 1 is the floor; Instagram already offers such a feed.5 Step 3 is the heart of the proposal.

Administration and enforcement: The FTC issues rules within 12 months, with compliance a year later. Age assurance follows privacy limits like New York's, including at least one method that needs no government ID and deletion of data after use.8 Civil penalties apply to deceptive alternatives and repeated resets.

Risks and Mitigations

  • Editorial rights: Courts treat some feed curation as expression. The Ninth Circuit let California's rule take effect but noted that "some personalized recommendation algorithms may be expressive,"9 so a national default will be challenged. Regulating only defaults and a user's own choice narrows the burden on platforms, but the risk remains.
  • Chronology is not safety: In Meta's 2020 experiment, chronological feeds showed users more political and untrustworthy content.3 That feed included pages and groups; limiting minors' default to accounts they chose should narrow the exposure, and ordinary moderation still applies.
  • Users move elsewhere: The same experiment found some time shifted to TikTok and YouTube.3 Covering every large platform limits that leakage, though not all of it.

Similar Bills

Fit measures similarity to this proposal's mechanisms: High = direct precedent; Partial = useful component with material differences; Related = adjacent approach.

Federal — 119th Congress

Proposal or bill Relevant provisions and fit Fit
H.R. 6253 — Algorithmic Transparency and Choice Act
Cammack (R-FL)
Subcommittee advanced · Dec. 11, 2025		 §2(a)(2) makes an input-transparent algorithm the default for minors; §2(a)(1)(C) lets them switch easily. Close precedent for Step 3; input-transparent need not mean chronological or followed accounts only, and switching needs no parental consent. High
S. 1748 — Kids Online Safety Act
Blackburn (R-TN), Blumenthal (D-CT), Thune (R-SD), Schumer (D-NY)
Ordered reported with a substitute · Aug. 5, 2026		 Introduced §202 lets every user switch from an opaque algorithm to an input-transparent one and bars charging more for that choice; §103(a)(1)(D) lets minors opt out while keeping a chronological feed. Precedent for Steps 1 and 2; no minor default. Compares introduced text; the substitute was not reviewed. High
S. 278 — Kids Off Social Media Act
Schatz (D-HI), Cruz (R-TX) + 11 bipartisan original cosponsors
Reported by Senate Commerce · June 30, 2025		 §104 bars personalized recommendations for users under 17 while permitting chronological display of content a teen follows. Stronger than Step 3; no parental opt-in and a different age line. Partial
H.R. 7757 — KIDS Act
Guthrie (R-KY)
Passed House · June 29, 2026		 §214(a)(1)(F) and (a)(3) give minors a recommendation opt-out, with the most protective setting as the default. Partial precedent for Step 3; no defined chronological feed, and it covers users under 17. Partial

State

Proposal or bill Relevant provisions and fit Fit
New York — SAFE for Kids Act (S7694A)
Chapter 120 of 2024
Final rules July 28, 2026 · Effective Jan. 25, 2027		 Users under 18 see content from accounts they follow or select, in a set sequence such as chronological order, unless a parent consents to a personalized feed; parent and minor may withdraw consent. Closest precedent for Step 3; covers platforms where users spend at least 20% of their time in such feeds. High
California — SB 976 (2024)
Chapter 321
Feed provisions not enjoined · 9th Cir., Sept. 9, 2025; rehearing denied Nov. 6, 2025		 §27001 bars addictive feeds for known minors without verifiable parental consent; §27002(b)(4) lets parents require a nonpersonalized default. Strong precedent for Step 3; broader exceptions and no explicit followed-accounts, newest-first feed. High
Massachusetts — S. 3175
Passed Senate 38–2 · July 9, 2026
In House Ways and Means		 Proposed ch. 93M, §2(a) disables addictive feeds for minors and for users who skip age checks; minors cannot change the default. More restrictive than Step 3; no parental opt-in. Partial

What this adds: New York and California require parental consent for personalized feeds, and Meta has agreed to offer minors a non-personalized option. This proposal defines the alternative (newest-first posts from followed accounts), makes it the national default for minors on every large platform, and gives adults a choice that sticks.

Notes

  1. FTC v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 20-3590 (D.D.C. Nov. 18, 2025), mem. op. at 8–9, citing Meta's January 2025 surface data: Americans spend 17% of their Facebook time and 7% of their Instagram time viewing friends' content; what replaced it is "for the most part, short videos posted by strangers and recommended by AI." The court ruled for Meta on the FTC's monopolization claims. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  2. Instagram, "See the Moments You Care About First," Instagram Blog, March 15, 2016. ↩

  3. Andrew M. Guess et al., "How Do Social Media Feed Algorithms Affect Attitudes and Behavior in an Election Campaign?" Science 381, no. 6656 (2023). Randomized experiment with consenting Facebook and Instagram users over three months in fall 2020, run in collaboration with Meta; the chronological feed included content from pages and groups. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  4. Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 (Digital Services Act), Article 38, applying to very large online platforms (45 million or more average monthly EU users, Article 33). ↩

  5. ABC News (Australia), "Instagram chief Adam Mosseri warns against turning off algorithm as Australia debates opt-out laws," September 10, 2026. The uptake figure is Mosseri's "educated guess" for Australia; ABC reports the feed reverts on reopening outside the Netherlands. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  6. California Attorney General, "Attorney General Bonta Secures Transformative $17 Billion Settlement with Meta," August 26, 2026: "An option for users under 18 to have a non-personalized feed." NPR reported that the court approved the settlement hours after it was filed. ↩

  7. S. 278, Kids Off Social Media Act, 119th Cong. § 104 (reported text, June 30, 2025). ↩

  8. New York Attorney General, "Attorney General James and Governor Hochul Release Final SAFE for Kids Act Rules," July 28, 2026. The act takes effect January 25, 2027. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  9. NetChoice v. Bonta, No. 25-146 (9th Cir. Sept. 9, 2025), affirming denial of a preliminary injunction against California SB 976's personalized-feed provisions; the California Attorney General said the ruling allows most of the law to take effect while litigation proceeds. ↩ ↩2

  10. S. 1748, Kids Online Safety Act, 119th Cong. §§ 201(5), 202(b)(1)(B) (introduced text). ↩