What's the alternative? There seem to be obvious negative externalities which the promulgating industries seem disincentivized to address...seems to be a legitimate basis for government intervention.

*Not necessarily agreeing with the proposed solution here of a mandated approach. Just saying that this may be a situation where government intervention is necessary even if it's just to sponsor public education of options that parents have to protect children.

The alternative is to take advantage of tools already out on the market developed privately to help people lock down and filter content from the internet. Content and privacy filters have been out forever...use those instead of the government heavy handedly imposing something.

My opinion (and strictly an opinion) is if diverse types of information are more readily available you can either lock down your child's access to that information OR you can prepare them for what they might encounter. Separately its also good to guide them on access and responsible use of the world's knowledge (good, bad, moral, immoral) which is literally at their fingertips

It's additionally odd given that the GOP is (allegedly) the party of "personal responsibility" . You would think this translates to expecting parents to supervise children, rather than have "government interference" do it for you. Regardless of what you think of the law, it's effective at highlighting that the GOP isn't really the "small government" folks that pundits want to make them out to be.