Harry EASTMAN

I listened to the testimony today on SB 648, and I felt there was too little discussion of how the internet actually works in practice. Age verification bills, no matter the state, seem to do very little to stop minors from accessing adult material while creating real privacy risks for adults. Minors can visit sites outside the United States, including free tube sites, many of which do not follow U.S. laws. For example, if a site in Europe does not comply with a U.S. age verification law, minors could still access adult material there without even needing a VPN. Meanwhile, adults in the United States are being asked to hand over sensitive personal information online, often to third parties we know nothing about. One part of this bill I still do not understand is the percentage threshold. New Hampshire is proposing 50 percent. If I understand that correctly, a site like Reddit or Twitter would not have to verify age, meaning minors could still see hardcore adult content there without any age verification. I feel that really defeats the purpose of the bill. It just does not make sense. These bills do not appear to stop minors so much as push them elsewhere, often to less safe and less accountable corners of the internet. I have read quite a bit about device-based age verification, and there is also software parents can place on their children’s devices to block adult content. I have several friends who do this. Why not focus on a shared approach that includes parents, device-based tools, and responsible websites, rather than placing the burden entirely on adult sites, search engines, social media platforms, sex educators, magazines, sexual wellness websites, and others? A combined approach would make far more sense, especially if the goal is to protect minors without forcing adults to hand over sensitive personal information online.