Interesting. To meet their definition of "social media platform" requires that it "Utilizes addictive, harmful, or deceptive design features, or any other feature that is designed to cause an account holder to have an excessive or compulsive need to use or engage with the social media platform."
Also, they have a large list of exclusions. Some of the phrasing sounds like under-16 people are mostly limited to person-to-person messaging, consuming content produced by others, and being able to access certain services that got exclusions.
Being able to speak publicly is sometimes expressly not allowed in these exclusions, but it is at least implied in other exclusions (which I guess might have originated to allowlist specific companies).
Teens who care to observe the law at all (many will not) will quickly realize that they can figuratively drive a truck right through some of those loopholes. (Example: a "photo editing & hosting" service with accounts and likes and comments is pretty much Twitter or Facebook, once an exodus of kids from "social media" starts congregating there. Bonus rebelious vibe, and the freedom/coolness that your parents and grandparents, and mean school principal haven't yet discovered it.)
If I had an online service that had under-16 among its users who were doing public expression/communication/content, and my business wasn't already clearly excluded, I would be scrambling to lobby for an exclusion. (I would also be discouraging this particular formulation of law, in the public interest, but remiss if I didn't have a backup plan for my immediate business in the case that it passed.)
