A contentious congressional hearing on Wednesday saw a unanimous push for regulations on social media specifically related to children.

U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley - R-MO - pushed Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to apologize to families of child victims over social media that caused exploitation, harm and death.

The CEOs of Meta, X - formerly Twitter, TikTok, Discord and Snap testified at the hearing. Zuckerberg and Snap's CEO Evan Spiegel gave apologies for the first time, after Hawley put them on the spot.

"Would you like to do so now? Well, they're here, you're on national television," said Hawley. "Would you like now to apologize to the victims who have been harmed by your products? Show them the pictures. Would you like to apologize for what you've done to these good people?"

Zuckerberg turned and stood and faced the audience and said "I'm sorry for everything you have all been through. No one should go through the things that your families have suffered and this is why we invest so much, and we are going to continue doing industrywide efforts to make sure no one has to go through the things your families have had to suffer."

Some victims' families have said although they were a surprise, they didn't think the apologies sounded sincere.

Members of Congress said they hoped to find common ground in an effort to create laws that would make the internet a safer place. Senators including Sen. Jon Ossoff - D-GA - repeatedly asked the social media tycoons to consider the victims and recognize the risks of being online.

"We want to work in a productive, open, honest and collaborative way to pass legislation that will protect American children above all," said Ossoff. "If we don't start with an open, honest, candid, realistic assessment of the issues, we can't do that if you're not willing to acknowledge the internet is a dangerous place for children."

Earlier this week, explicit deep-fake Artificial Intelligence images of pop icon Taylor Swift were also released on X.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre announced that legislation would be the obvious way to remedy this type of offense.

In the last days of President Joe Biden's term, senators are tackling some of their highest priorities, like confirming judges. But that may also include passing a bill to protect reporters and their sources.

The Protect Reporters from Exploitative State Spying Act would provide a federal shield law for a reporter to protect the identities of their sources.

Lucy Dalglish, former dean of the Merrill College of Journalism, said the bill would protect all types of journalists, from independent reporters to those at mainstream publications.

"It covers more than just traditional, mainstream media journalists," she said. "It covers folks, such as ones who are working for this radio network, and others who regularly collect information, digest it in some way and disseminate it to the public."

She added the bill also bans investigators going to telecommunications or other internet companies to see who a reporter has been in contact with. Right now, 49 states and Washington, D.C. have a shield law or some legal precedent on the books.

In January, the legislation unanimously passed the House of Representatives. But last week, the bill failed after Sen. Tom Cotton, R-AR, objected to its passage. The only way now for the bill to pass Congress is if it is attached to another piece of legislation - or if the Senate has a stand-alone vote on the bill.

Dalglish said it's sometimes surprising how administrations vary in their subpoenas of reporters. For example, she explained, many thought the subpoenaing of reporters after 9/11 would stop with a new president. But Dalglish said President Barack Obama and his justice department accessed the phone records of more reporters than any other president.

"And you get more subpoenas during different times in history, what's going on in society. It hasn't been too bad lately, but it goes in spurts," she said. "And of course, we really have no idea what's going to be going on in this new Trump administration."

A slew of press freedom organizations support the proposed law, including the Society of Professional Journalists and Reporters Without Borders.


get more stories like this via email

Gov. Kristi Noem wants a big budget cut for South Dakota Public Broadcasting in 2026. That could hurt its nine television stations and 11 radio stations, and the South Dakotans they serve.

Noem is proposing just under $2 million for South Dakota Public Broadcasting, or SDPB, in 2026. That's a cut of about 65% - or more than $3.5 million below its 2025 budget.

Plus, according to SDPB Executive Director Julie Overgaard, less state funding would threaten another $1 million in grants.

"It's devastating news for SDPB," said Overgaard, "and - in my belief and others' - it basically puts us on a trajectory for insolvency within the next 12 to 36 months."

In addition to news, Overgaard said SDPB covers high school sports, streams live legislative sessions and provides public interest programming on topics like children's issues and tourism.

Local news sources have been shutting down or being bought out for years. More than 3,200 U.S. newspapers have gone out of print since 2005, according to a report from the Local News Initiative.

Overgaard said the state's last locally-owned commercial TV station was sold to an out-of-state buyer this summer.

"We really kind of are the last stand here," said Overgaard, "for having something locally owned that's telling stories and providing news and issue coverage that are unique to South Dakota."

According to the report, six South Dakota counties are without a local news source and 33 counties have only one.

Overgaard said after state funding and grants, SDPB's third major source of funding is private donations and gifts - including from viewers and listeners.

She said she's worried that source will also slow down if SDPB can't keep covering local events and news.

"It's a tough go right now, I think, for public media organizations like ours," said Overgaard. "But I still think there's enough public support and enough public need for the services that we provide. "

The budget cuts are likely to "disproportionately affect rural services, where SDPB's programming is most valued," according to a statement from the organization.




get more stories like this via email

The days of thumbing through a community newspaper are retreating into history.

A Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism 2024 report showed fewer than 5,600 newspapers are still in business and 80% are weekly publications. The data also found the Illinois counties of Hamilton, Wayne, Franklin, Jefferson, Perry and Saline have only one newspaper each. Four others have none.

Fewer publications mean more news deserts, which are communities without regular access to information.

Zachery Metzger, director of the State of Local News project at Northwestern, said news access nationwide will vary.

"I think that the crisis within newspapers, traditional print newspapers, is going to continue to deepen," Metzger observed. "A lot of those are going to continue to disappear. I think that the crisis of local news and the loss of news is not limited to rural areas."

Metzger pointed out few news options remain beyond nationally syndicated TV news from understaffed, overworked stations with limited coverage. He noted social media chat groups like Facebook are platforms which "amplify misinformation and disinformation." According to the study, people living in news deserts tend to be older and less educated, and 16% live below the poverty line.

Several locally-based independent news ventures have started in the last few years to broaden access to underserved communities. Metzger reported since 2019, 95% of philanthropic donations to the outlets have focused on heavily concentrated and centralized urban metro areas.

"That doesn't mean that they're not producing a really valuable resource for people within those areas but those areas have the most news already," Metzger stressed. "While these new startups are providing really great services, they're often not addressing the needs of people in smaller, more rural or less affluent communities."

Metzger believes the existence of for-profit and nonprofit news outlets "is always going to be a good thing." He added there are still some smaller papers doing good work and neighborhoods are engaged in keeping their local news sources active. He thinks local newsrooms need state legislative action, greater philanthropic diversity and donations to survive.


get more stories like this via email