Regulating social media platforms is complex, not least because the “social” part deals with people and their characteristics, preferences, wants, and wishes. Any intervention must be cognizant of these differences. Regulating to protect one subset of people, such as filtering out content relating to eating disorders to protect individuals susceptible to being triggered by it, leads to compromises...
The strongest version of this narrative highlights the tension between protecting vulnerable populations and preserving fundamental rights, framing regulation as a necessary but nuanced endeavor. It credibly argues that proportionality assessments—like those in EU law—provide a structured way to evaluate trade-offs, avoiding knee-jerk or politically motivated restrictions. However, the discussion risks oversimplifying the feasibility of such assessments, given the difficulty of quantifying harms...