The FTC proposes barring Meta from monetizing kids' data, accusing the company of violating a 2020 order with its privacy program and COPPA with Messenger Kids
In an announcement today, the agency said that, on top of … Jamey Kistner : 🔒 The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has proposed changes to its 2020 privacy order with Facebook, accusing the company of failing to comply … Tweets: Andy Stone / @andymstone : Meta's statement on the FTC's political stunt. https://twitter.com/... Thom Lambert / @profthomlambert : I can't fathom why an agency about to face existential legal threats would push the boundaries like this, especially when doing so undermines its claim of expertise. The “no modified products” provision suggests @FTC doesn't understand how these businesses work. https://twitter.com/... @ftc : #BREAKING: FTC proposes blanket prohibition preventing Facebook from monetizing youth data. FTC says that the company violated 2020 privacy order; proposes new protections for children and teens: https://www.ftc.gov/... /1 @borrowed_ideas : Lina Khan may be unintentionally making sure no new cool social apps can take off. These regulations can hurt Meta's profitability but may entrench the moat even further which may lower terminal value risks. https://www.wsj.com/... Carl Szabo / @carlszabo : Another political stunt by the Biden @FTC. And it's the latest example of weaponization of government. @linakhanFTC lost her loser case against @Meta -Within. Now she's desperate to find a win even at the expense of consumers. Benedict Evans / @benedictevans : I have no opinion on where and how much Meta is really in breach of the 2020 order. But how exactly can Meta “be prohibited from releasing new or modified products, services, or features”? It pushes new code thousands of times a day. https://twitter.com/... Benedict Evans / @benedictevans : ('You can't launch new stuff' would be coherent, but 'you can't change *anything*' is not) Brian Albrecht / @briancalbrecht : @benedictevans There's lots of talk about whether non-expert courts can handle these issues. But what if, hypothetically, the agencies don't understand basic tech issues? Robert Bateman / @robertjbateman : On a serious note, there are some very tall weeds to get into on this one. Meta is denying the FTC's allegations with even more rigour than usual, and one of the three commissioners to vote “yes” appears to think that the FTC lacks the power to impose the proposed order. Tiffany C. Li / @tiffanycli : I generally support the FTC on privacy, but I'm not sure about this one. 1. What's the legal basis for a blanket ban? And FTC's authority? 2. How is a tech co at Meta's scale supposed to stop all product/feature launches *and modifications* until an external assessment is done? https://twitter.com/... Imran Ahmed / @imi_ahmed : This is really huge - important, substantive and potentially game-changing in protecting kids online. https://www.ftc.gov/... @neil_chilson : I just don't get the strategy here. By proposing aggressive order modifications unrelated to the underlying violations, this FTC is trashing its credibility in future settlement negotiations. If the agency can just up and impose huge burdens whenever it becomes politically viable to do so, why ever settle? Matt Stoller / @matthewstoller : 2. Facebook's own auditor, and Facebook itself, saw significant privacy problems. The FTC then investigated and “the most serious deficiencies and sheer number of total gaps and weaknesses overall present substantial risks to the public.” https://www.ftc.gov/... Tiffany C. Li / @tiffanycli : On the other hand, maybe the FTC should just go all out and have fun with it while the Chevron doctrine still exists @robleathern : @garjoh_canuck Overreach? Khan's AI oped today also made it clear what their priors are: “The result has been an online economy where access to increasingly essential services is conditioned on the widespread hoarding and sale of our personal data.” Nancy Scola / @nancyscola : The FTC's own FAQ calls its push to modify the order in this way an “unusual step” — not exactly shying away from the idea that it's a change in practice as much as it is a remedy involving one particular company. https://www.ftc.gov/... https://twitter.com/... Kontra / @counternotions : Facebook: 2023: FTC accusing us for violating our consent decree order from 2020 is a “political stunt”. As a business, we have the right to exploit teens but we're too big to be punished and, look, TikTok. 2015: ↓ https://twitter.com/... Andy Stone / @andymstone : @Swiftstories ... Yes, that was a report based on just the first six months of a 20-year order. The assessor is in fact legally obligated to find areas of improvement; that's the assessor's job. Assessor also said “the key foundational elements necessary for an effective program are now in place.” Mike Swift / @swiftstories : It's a little surprising @Meta says it was so blindsided by @FTC allegation it violated the 2020 consent decree, as @mlexclusive scooped back in 2021 that the independent assessor found significant “gaps and weaknesses” in @Facebook compliance. https://mlexmarketinsight.com/ ... https://twitter.com/... Andy Stone / @andymstone : The FTC's approach is an abuse of authority and wrong on the facts. We have not violated the agreement. KEY POINT: The two privacy incidents the FTC identified today to support their action were discovered by us, fixed, and publicly disclosed three years ago. https://twitter.com/... Benedict Evans / @benedictevans : @BrianCAlbrecht It's like when the EU said messaging apps had to allow ‘any’ third party to interconnect and give them ‘all’ of their internal data. “So, if the Chinese government makes an app, we have to give it all of our user data? Did you think that through?” Garrett Johnson / @garjoh_canuck : What is the legal basis for this decision? COPPA only goes to age 13. Is Meta alone required to subsidize the provision of services for users under the age of 18? https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/... Robert Bateman / @robertjbateman : Essentially, the allegations seem to be that Meta - Continued to allow third-party access to Facebook data post-Cambridge Analytica for a few months after it was promised to stop - Falsely claimed kids could only communicate with parent-vetted contacts on its Messenger Kids app Adam Kovacevich / @adamkovac : Here's the key thing to note about the FTC's announcement today: The FTC is using allegations that FB violated its 2020 consent decree to demand sweeping new requirements. Dem Cmr @alvarombedoya says in a statement that he's not sure whether the FTC has authority to do that.... https://twitter.com/... @neil_chilson : Kudos to @BedoyaFTC for saying what ought to be obvious: Order modifications have limits! The FTC is again cutting corners and is going to get ripped for this. https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/... @openmarkets : We applaud the @FTC's revamped efforts to stop the profiting of kids' personal data. The surveillance advertising model that all #BigTech corporations rely on has only served to fortify their monopoly power at the expense of our personal privacy... https://twitter.com/... Mike Swift / @swiftstories : Full picture: the assessment we got through #FOI also said: The initial assessment by global consulting firm Protiviti, covering 6 months ending in April after the FTC's privacy order took effect, “confirms that the [FTC] Order constituted a watershed moment at Facebook,”.... https://twitter.com/... Robert Bateman / @robertjbateman : So the FTC has voted 3-0 to adopt an “Order to Show Cause”, which marks the beginning of a process that could end in Meta being banned from monetising kids' data. The FTC alleges that Meta violated two consent orders. Here are some scintillating extracts from the FTC's order. https://twitter.com/... Jason Goldman / @goldman : But they said so, so many times that they knew they had to do better. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... https://twitter.com/... @fboversight : Andy Stone's statement clearly demonstrates Facebook's disregard for the rule of law. For years, the company has viewed itself as above the law and uses its influence machine to work actively against real policy reform. But attacking the Chair of the FTC and calling this a “political stunt” is a new low, even for Facebook. Chris Hoofnagle / @hoofnagle : Finally, the FTC's proposed order prohibits all monetization of child data, including its use in training ML; it also orders a “pause” on new services until compliance can be demonstrated. These interventions have more deterrent effect than billion-dollar fines. Megan Gray / @megangra : @hoofnagle Current FB order didn't change order terms on this component (FB selecting the outside company), just added more window dressing for FTC/DOJ to object to selection if so inclined. Chris Hoofnagle / @hoofnagle : A few thoughts on the FTC's move on Facebook—First, regardless of the underlying facts, the FTC's approach probably was made possible by it ending the practice of letting respondents choose their own assessors. The assessment was done by Protiviti https://www.ftc.gov/... Megan Gray / @megangra : Actually, FB chose (& paid) Protiviti. Yes, FB's very own “independent” assessor said FB's privacy practices were shit. Imagine how horrendous FB privacy practices had to be for Protiviti to take position that it KNEW meant it would NEVER AGAIN get hired by BigTech. https://twitter.com/... Matt Stoller / @matthewstoller : 1. Big news. The FTC just found that Facebook violated its consent decree order from 2020, as well as other laws against violating the privacy of kids. So the FTC will ban targeted ads to children, to stop the incentive to engage in surveillance. https://www.ftc.gov/... Roger McNamee / @moonalice : Brava, @linakhanFTC! In the 6+ years of my activism for reform of Big Tech, this is by far the most important reform in the US. Kudos to @FTC, @EPICprivacy, @openmarkets, @CarissaVeliz and all the others who have fought to make this happen. https://www.ftc.gov/... Jane Chung / @orientaljanedoe : lmao at least when i worked there in 2014 the “industry-leading privacy program” was a bunch of add'l hires called privacy program managers who told PMs things like “guys maybe we should have an optout? like not saying it should be default obv but-” and immediately get shut down https://twitter.com/... Robert Weissman / @rob_weissman : We would live in a very different — and much better and kinder — world if social media companies could not monetize the data they collect from kids. Now the FTC proposes to impose that rule, at least for Facebook. https://www.cnbc.com/... Matt Stoller / @matthewstoller : 3. Facebook is extremely mad and calls it a ‘political stunt,’ saying the FTC should focus on TikTok. (Of course, the FTC does have an order against TikTok, but whatever.) https://twitter.com/... Jeffrey Chester / @chesterj1 : Anyone who knows how #Meta operates understands that these #FTC protections for kids and teens are needed. This is serious, not a stunt. Such a statement is disrespectful to parents and others who care about children. @andymstone https://twitter.com/... Lee Hepner / @leehepner : Alternatively, Meta's flagrant ongoing violations of the 2020 Order are a political stunt. https://twitter.com/... @_alialkhatib : this clumsy maneuver is super interesting IMHO: andy seems to be trying to whistle for a SCOTUS case in an effort to shrink the FTC's purview/authority to nothing, putting regulatory decisions about data privacy into the hands of congress, where any effort is guaranteed to fail https://twitter.com/... @supbagholder : $meta calling out @linakhanFTC by name. You know shit is about to go down. https://twitter.com/... Patrick Hedger / @pathedger18 : Considering this is part of the FTC's new demands, Meta's response here is completely justified. The government itself is not even held to such standards of privacy. https://twitter.com/... https://twitter.com/... David Shepardson / @davidshepardson : Facebook parent company goes after @FTC on TikTok saying it is allowing Chinese companies like TikTok “to operate without constraint on American soil” https://twitter.com/... @ryanbarwick : 🚨New: The FTC is proposing a ban on Meta's collection of kids data. “Facebook has repeatedly violated its privacy promises...The company's recklessness has put young users at risk and Facebook needs to answer for its failures.” Meta can appeal the decision. @stockmktnewz : The US FTC has proposed barring Facebook $META from profiting off data it collects from young users, after concluding that the company repeatedly violated its privacy promises - WSJ Cat Zakrzewski / @cat_zakrzewski : NEW: FTC plans to bar Meta from monetizing teens' data, following allegations that the company violated its 2020 privacy order https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...
Context & Ripple Effects
The proposal turns Meta’s earlier privacy settlement into a test of whether the FTC can impose tougher operating restrictions when it alleges noncompliance, rather than merely pursue a new standalone case. Meta disputes both the alleged violations and the agency’s authority to revise the order.
The dispute sits alongside a broader regulatory focus on children’s data: the FTC later outlined additional proposed protections for children’s data and targeted advertising, while Meta subsequently sought to halt the agency’s attempted order changes in a constitutional challenge to the FTC’s in-house process.
First-order effects
- Meta faces a proposed restriction on monetizing minors’ data, alongside new safeguards tied to alleged deficiencies in Messenger Kids and its privacy program; the restriction is not final while the process is contested.
- The FTC is attempting to use an existing consent order as the vehicle for product- and data-use limits, raising the stakes of Meta’s compliance response.
Second-order effects
- A successful modification would pressure other ad-supported platforms serving children to reassess whether their data practices can be defended under COPPA and existing privacy commitments.
- The fight also makes enforcement procedure central: Meta’s later challenge to the FTC’s adjudicative process could affect how readily the agency can turn alleged order violations into new operational restrictions.
Third-order effects
- If sustained, this approach would shift privacy settlements from one-time penalties toward ongoing constraints on how platforms design child-facing products and monetize data.
- The episode points to a more consequential boundary between privacy enforcement and product governance, though courts and agency process will determine how durable that boundary becomes.
The trend: Privacy regulators are increasingly seeking to convert child-data obligations and prior settlements into continuing limits on platform business models.