119-HR-6290 Journalist Public Summary
119 · HR 6290 Safe Social Media Act
H.R. 6290 would have the Federal Trade Commission, with Health and Human Services, study how teens use social media and report findings—and any policy recommendations—to Congress within three years; it doesn’t set new rules, but seeks data to guide future action, and was introduced with bipartisan sponsorship on November 25, 2025, now awaiting action in the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Headline Summary
A bipartisan House bill would order the Federal Trade Commission to study teen social media use—what data platforms collect, how algorithms and ads target minors, usage patterns, and mental-health impacts—and report back to Congress within three years.
What It Does
The Safe Social Media Act (H.R. 6290) directs the FTC, in coordination with the Department of Health and Human Services, to conduct a nationwide study of how people under 17 use social media. It covers what data platforms collect on minors, how that data feeds algorithms and targeted ads, how often teens use these services, how usage differs by age, and links to mental health—along with potential harms and benefits. The FTC must deliver a report to Congress with any policy recommendations within three years of the bill becoming law. The bill exempts this study from the Paperwork Reduction Act to speed data collection. It defines “social media platform” broadly as public, user‑generated content services (e.g., social networks, video sharing) and expressly excludes broadband providers and email.
- Agency roles: FTC leads; HHS (through the Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use) assists.
- Scope: data collection practices, algorithmic use of data, targeted advertising, usage frequency, age‑based differences, mental‑health effects, and overall harms/benefits.
- Deadline: final report due to Congress within three years of enactment.
- Process waiver: the Paperwork Reduction Act would not apply to this study, shortening administrative steps.
- Definitions: applies to public user‑generated content platforms; explicitly excludes ISPs and email services.
Who’s For It
- Lead sponsors: Rep. Cliff Bentz (R‑OR) and Rep. Kim Schrier (D‑WA), signaling bipartisan interest in teen online safety and privacy.
- Potential supporters (based on the bill’s aims): parent and youth mental‑health advocates; some child‑safety and public‑health groups seeking government‑led evidence to inform policy.
Who’s Against It
No formal opposition is listed in the provided materials. However, common critiques of similar study‑first proposals may surface:
- Privacy and data‑collection worries: even a government study may require sensitive information from platforms or surveys involving minors.
- Process concerns: the Paperwork Reduction Act exemption could draw objections from transparency or civil‑liberties groups that view PRA reviews as an accountability check.
- Timing: a three‑year timeline could be seen as too slow given current debates over teen mental health and social media.
- Overlap: skeptics may argue that ample research already exists and that Congress should prioritize concrete safeguards over another study.
What’s Next
- Status as of November 25, 2025: introduced in the House and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Next steps: potential committee hearings and a markup; if approved, a House floor vote. The Senate would then consider its own version or this bill. If both chambers pass identical text, it goes to the President.
- If enacted: the FTC, with HHS, would begin the study and must submit the report to Congress within three years of enactment.
Discussion