Digital Censorship & Supporting Our LGBTQIA+ Community
For so many in our community, especially LGBTQIA+ youth, the internet is far more than just a place to browse—it's a lifeline. It's a space to find community, get support, and hear the one message they may not hear anywhere else: "You are not alone."
Right now, that lifeline is being deliberately targeted.
We are seeing a wave of legislation—at the state and federal level—aimed at censoring these online spaces. They are being disguised as efforts to "protect minors," but this is a bad-faith tactic. Instead of protecting our youth, these laws would cut them off from the very communities that keep them safe.
This threat extends far beyond one group. It's a strategy that also silences survivors of abuse and blocks access to critical reproductive healthcare. This is a direct attack on the basic freedoms of all people.
This is not a fight we can watch from the sidelines. That is why my office sponsored a hearing order to initiate a discussion around digital censorship and it’s impact on our community. Wednesday, November 12, we convened the Committee on Civil Rights, Racial Equity, and Immigrant Advancement to hear directly from experts and residents.
The message from that hearing was undeniable: digital censorship is a direct assault on our community's most vital support systems.
In this newsletter, I want to break down what "digital censorship" actually is, highlight the key effects it has on our community that we learned about in the hearing, and emphasize that this is just the first step in our ongoing work to ensure these freedoms remain intact.
What is "Digital Censorship"?
Digital censorship is a systemic strategy to control information and block access to online communities, often disguised as "safety" legislation.
To understand the current debate, it’s helpful to know the different forms digital censorship can take and the specific laws being proposed. These measures often aim to regulate online content, but their methods can have broad consequences.
Content Filtering Mandates
Some proposed bills, like the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), aim to protect minors by requiring online platforms to "prevent and mitigate" content deemed harmful, such as content related to mental health or harassment. The concern, however, is that this broad language could be used to filter or remove essential health resources and identity-affirming content for LGBTQIA+ youth, effectively limiting their access to community spaces and support.
Age Verification & Data Collection
Other laws, such as the SCREEN Act, propose mandating age verification for users to access certain websites. This would often require users to upload sensitive personal information, like a government ID or even submit to biometric scans (like facial recognition). This approach raises significant privacy concerns about creating large databases of personal data. It also creates practical barriers for those who may lack a government-issued ID or are not comfortable sharing such information, potentially blocking them from online educational materials.
Changes to Platform Liability (Section 230)
You may also hear talk about modifying Section 230, a law that generally shields websites from liability for content their users post. The concern with weakening this law is that to avoid legal risks, platforms might choose to over-censor content. Weakening this law would enable states with extreme anti-choice or anti-trans laws to criminalize access to online information about abortion or gender-affirming care.
While often presented as solutions for safety, these legislative models carry significant implications for privacy and access to information.
A key finding from our hearing was how these different regulatory methods could combine to limit access to life-saving educational materials and community spaces for marginalized groups.
A Deeper Look: How This Censorship Harms
Our Communities
This issue doesn’t only impact the LGBTQIA+ community.
Digital censorship impacts countless other marginalized communities, including survivors of abuse and those seeking reproductive healthcare. Criminalizing access to information—whether it’s related to LGBTQIA+ identities or reproductive healthcare—is an impermissible attack on the basic freedoms of all people.
For the LGBTQIA+ Community
Cutting Off Lifelines: These online spaces are essential for queer and trans youth, providing information, mutual aid and support that may not be available to them otherwise.
Enabling Censorship: Bills like the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) are particularly dangerous. They could grant current or future administrations—including those hostile to LGBTQIA+ rights—sweeping authority to censor queer and trans content online.
Losing Community: Instead of protecting our youth, cutting access to these online spaces would deeply harm them. These online spaces are what protect our youth: by giving them community, by showing them that they aren’t alone in their experiences, and by cultivating an accessible space for Queer joy, not just survival.
Blocking Information: Weakening online protections could also allow states to criminalize access to content about gender-affirming care and sever the connections LGBTQIA+ individuals have with their broader community.
For Reproductive Freedom
The same mechanisms used to censor queer content can be used to attack reproductive rights.
Criminalizing Information: Attacks on digital protections like Section 230 would enable states with extreme anti-reproductive rights laws to criminalize access to online content about abortion.
Blocking Access: For people seeking reproductive health care, online resources are a vital lifeline for finding accurate medical information and support. These laws would slam that door shut.
For Vulnerable Residents
These laws don't just censor content; they also destroy privacy and create barriers to access.
Destroying Anonymity: Mandatory age verification laws would require all internet users to upload government identification or submit to invasive biometric scans.
Harming Marginalized Groups: These ID requirements create massive barriers for marginalized communities, including undocumented individuals, unhoused residents, and anyone who lacks a government ID or fears being tracked.
What We're Doing: Listening to Community
Part of being an affirming City and protecting our LGBTQIA+ residents is ensuring the community’s continued access to these vital online resources.
That’s why this past Wednesday, the Boston City Council held a public hearing to examine the impacts of this proposed legislation.
Our goal was to hear directly from the community and Administration to explore how the City of Boston can protect our residents’ rights to free expression, privacy, and access to lifesaving resources.
We heard powerful testimony from three panels of experts, including representatives from:
TQNC (The Queer Neighborhood Council)
BAGLY (Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth)
Thank you to everyone who made time to join us for the hearing and speak out to protect our community’s digital freedoms.
Criminalizing access to information—whether about gender identity or reproductive health—is an impermissible attack on the basic freedoms of all people.
This fight is bigger than any one group. As we heard in our hearing, digital censorship doesn't just target the LGBTQIA+ community; it's a tactic used to silence survivors of abuse, restrict access to reproductive healthcare, and marginalize countless others.
Being an affirming city means more than words; it means ensuring the community’s continued access to these vital online resources.