News

Now that Google is required to share its search data with competitors, the question turns to whether such sharing can be done in a way that is privacy safe. Do PETs offer a solution? Is this simply a place where privacy interests and competition interests are perpetually at odds? Is this simply another opportunity for Google to delay? Alan Chapell sits down with Alissa Cooper of the KGI to discuss the DOJ search remedies, the EU Digital Markets Act, privacy, AI, and what search data sharing could mean for competition and innovation.

Alabama officials are grappling with the negative consequences of artificial intelligence and social media platforms that can lead some users to isolation, addiction, abuse and self-harm. The Study Commission on Artificial Intelligence and Children’s Internet Safety heard presentations Wednesday on ways to regulate algorithms and legislation to help stem the proliferation of AI-generated images that victimize real people.

Measuring Risk II finds that Snap and YouTube have internal capabilities to measure risk and evaluate safety interventions, yet their public risk assessments provide little evidence that their safety mitigations reach users or work in practice.

KGI’s Peter Chapman was featured on the Boys & Men Online Podcast from the American Institute for Boys and Men to break down what the current trials in the US against the world’s largest social media companies mean for addictive social media design and online risks to youth.

A landmark case is forcing Brussels to decide whether opening Google’s search data to rivals can boost competition without undermining Europeans’ privacy.

Europe’s pro-competition proposals could see Google Search and Android systems opened up. The company claims there are serious privacy flaws.

In June 2026, KGI welcomed Claire McCrea as Operations Associate. Claire provides operational support to KGI, the Center for Digital Ethics, and the Institute for Technology Law & Policy.

Google’s dominance in search is increasingly under scrutiny as regulators on both sides of the Atlantic consider whether new rules could reshape competition in the AI-driven search era. Against this backdrop, earlier this year, the European Commission initiated specification proceedings regarding Google’s noncompliance with Article 6(11) of the Digital Markets Act (DMA), which requires the company to share ranking, query, click, and view data with its rivals.

Jury verdicts against technology juggernauts like Meta Platforms Inc. and Uber Technologies Inc. are spotlighting the role complex litigation plays in shaping tech policy in the absence of comprehensive legislation. Bellwether trial losses and settlements in cases over social media and ride-share platform safety have become important pressure points in creating substantive design limits.

A landmark New Mexico case, which alleges that Meta failed to protect children online, has entered a pivotal new phase—one that will test whether courts can require changes that make social media safe for young users.

A new framework from the Knight-Georgetown Institute, Tech Justice Law, and the USC Marshall School Neely Center provides a practical, evidence-based guide to help litigators, courts, and policymakers craft effective, enforceable remedies for harms linked to social media and generative AI chatbot companies, as lawsuits expand across the United States.

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez won a historic sum of $375 million in a landmark child safety case against Meta earlier this year. But the next stage of the fight could be even more consequential for Meta and the social media industry at large.