[josho]

Somehow if my teenaged kids spent as much time in LinkedIn networking business relationships as they did in Snapchat I wouldn't quite mind as much.

Regardless, I think you've missed the part where the FTC said what they were gathering information on, e.g. "how[social media] practices affect children and teens."

[bilbo0s]

I think you've missed the part where the FTC said what they were gathering information on, e.g. "how[social media] practices affect children and teens."

I didn't miss that part.

That's why I said that I don't trust people who say they are "thinking of the children". If you trust their intentions, well, we can peaceably agree to disagree.

[HexagonalKitten]

That sounds wrong. Many of my best friends live every day thinking of their children and their future. I welcome congress acting like this.

I don't trust laws justified with only a soundbite though, whatever the soundbite is.

[bilbo0s]

And if your friends are the politicians in charge, then maybe that would be a good argument that I should be less skeptical about the "think of the children" claim.

But your friends are likely not the politicians in charge, and even if they were, I wouldn't take the word of an anonymous internet poster that said friends were wholly honest and forthright in this regard. I would remain skeptical of their intentions. The recipe for good democracy includes a healthy amount of skepticism. Skepticism is what motivates investigations and inquiries. Inquiries of the type the FTC studiously avoided by not triggering the 10 entity flag.