The digital frontier is reshaping the way we resolve disputes. Join Juan Herrera, the head of the nation’s largest and longest-running vehicle warranty and lemon law dispute resolution program, BBB AUTO LINE, and Colin Rule, CEO of Mediate.com, as they explore how cutting-edge technologies are transforming online dispute resolution (ODR) across industries.
Whether you’re a legal professional, a mediator, or simply curious about the future of conflict resolution, this podcast will equip you with insights on the tech journey ODR has been on, and where ODR is headed.
Chapters:
00:00 – Intro & Guest Background: Juan Herrera welcomes Colin Rule, pioneer in online dispute resolution.
01:24 – What is ODR?: How technology transformed dispute resolution.
02:50 – Scaling Disputes at eBay: Building systems to handle millions of cases.
06:28 – Adapting for Complex Cases: Tailoring processes for high-value disputes.
09:56 – Pandemic Shift to Online Mediation: How COVID-19 changed the field.
14:24 – AI in Dispute Resolution: Current uses and future potential.
22:19 – Smart Contracts & Trust Tech: Blockchain’s role in resolving disputes.
26:16 – Ethics & Fairness in AI: Setting guardrails for trustworthy systems.
30:19 – Closing Thoughts: Colin’s vision for the future.
The Connecticut Data Privacy Act (CTDPA) grants important data rights to Connecticut residents and solidifies critical privacy obligations for covered businesses. The Global Privacy Control or “Universal Opt Out Control” provision of the Act is intended to help consumers regain contol over their own data, and shifts that responsibility to businesses.
BBB National Programs’ Vice President, Global Privacy Division and Privacy Initiatives Operations, BBB National Programs is joined by Jordan Levin, Assistant Attorney General, Privacy Section, Office of the Connecticut Attorney General, to discuss how the CTDPA changes the game when it comes to a consumer’s data privacy rights, how the process has been streamlined, but also how businesses are impacted by these changes.
It is not uncommon to hear that a child wants to be a content creator – making a living by sharing their hobbies, likes, and interests with a following on a social media platform like YouTube. A common business model for successful content creators is to work in paid partnership with a brand to market a product or service. How does that business model work when the influencer is a child?
In this episode of In the Sandbox, our host Rukiya Bonner, Director of the Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU), speaks with Pocket.Watch’s Julia Moonves and Angela Tiffin (a former CARU attorney) about the business of child influencers. Together, they break down the state laws protecting these young content creators – such as the Coogan law and the new Illinois child influencer law – as well as the role of a parent in the business and the special considerations that come into play when working with a young creator.
Key Takeaways:
Clear and conspicuous disclosures are essential in influencer videos to protect children and comply with advertising guidelines.
When partnering with creators, it is important to consider their established audience, content quality, and aligned values.
Influencer laws, such as the Coogan law, help protect child creators by requiring a percentage of their earnings to go into a trust account.
AI-generated children may impact content creation, but human creators offer authenticity and a connection that AI lacks.
Pocket.Watch prioritizes the well-being of child creators and works to minimize their involvement in commercial aspects of the work.
Chapters:
[00:00] Introduction and Overview
[01:03] Concerns about Influencer Videos and Disclosures
[02:52] Pocket.Watch: A Modern Kids Media Company
[04:15] Angela Tiffin’s Role and Experience at K.R.U.
[06:07] The Rise of Child Creators and Finding Partners
[09:30] Protecting Child Creators and Vetting Families
[12:49] Influencer Laws: Coogan Law and Related Legislation
[15:37] Providing Disclaimers and Protecting Creators
[17:34] The Impact of AI-Generated Children on Content Creation
[19:01] Prioritizing the Well-being of Child Creators
For the last 50 years, companies marketing to children have held each other to a higher standard. In 1974 the Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU) was established as the U.S. mechanism of independent self-regulation to protect children under age 13 from deceptive or inappropriate advertising. Over the years and as technology evolved, CARU expanded to address new media platforms, new advertising techniques, and to ensure that children’s data is collected and handled responsibly online.
Join Rukiya Bonner, Director, CARU, BBB National Programs and her guest, former CARU attorney Katie Goldstein, now the Global Head of Policy and Regulatory Affairs at SuperAwesome, as they take a trip down memory lane and revisit memorable child-directed commercials, discuss how advertising has changed over the years, identify some of CARU’s most impactful self-regulatory guidelines, and explain CARU’s role in helping ensure that as technology has changed, children remain protected.
In this episode, the host and guest discuss the history and impact of the Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU) in self-regulation and protecting children in the advertising space. Rukiya and Katie highlight the guidelines and cases that have shaped the industry over the past 50 years, including the importance of safety, diversity, and avoiding deceptive advertising practices. They also mention the role of pre-screening services, discuss the intersection of advertising and privacy, and conclude with a reminder that CARU’s guidelines still apply in the evolving landscape of AI and the metaverse.
Key Takeaways:
(4:22) The guidelines have evolved to address changing technology and advertising practices. Its evolving guidelines demonstrate adaptability to technological advancements and shifts in advertising methods, ensuring continued relevance and effectiveness.
(6:14) Safety, diversity, and avoiding deceptive practices are key priorities in children’s advertising. Advertisers have special responsibilities toward children and should recognize the power of advertising to promote positive change. Safety, diversity, and the prevention of deceptive practices stand as foundational pillars in CARU’s approach to children’s advertising, prioritizing the well-being and informed consumption of young viewers.
(10:19) Pre-screening services help ensure compliance with CARU guidelines. Through pre-screening services, CARU fortifies adherence to its guidelines, bolstering confidence in the ethical conduct of advertisers targeting children.
(19:01) CARU’s guidelines still apply in the evolving landscape of AI and the metaverse. Even in the emergent realms of AI and the metaverse, CARU’s guidelines maintain their applicability, serving as essential guardrails in navigating the evolving landscape of digital advertising. By upholding these standards, CARU fosters a safer and more transparent advertising environment for children, regardless of technological advancements.
As the drumbeat to modernize the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) continues, all components of the 1998 law have come under scrutiny, particularly the Safe Harbor provision. Under COPPA, the FTC has the ability to approve industry groups to administer self-regulatory programs implementing the protections for children outlined in the rule. Recently, some lawmakers have raised concerns that Safe Harbors are not an effective complement to the COPPA rule and might even be allowing for the rubberstamping of businesses that take advantage of Safe Harbors.
To answer this question of whether or Safe Harbors are effective, Mamie Kresses, Vice President of the Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU), hosted a discussion with two people who have been very involved in COPPA compliance from different perspectives: Sheila Millar, Partner at Keller and Heckman, and Daniel Kaufman, Partner at Baker Hostetler and former Deputy Director of the FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection. Listen in to hear these experts’ thoughts on the value of the Safe Harbor provision, whether it should remain a part of the rule going forward, and ways the provision can be modernized and improved.
For more information about this episode, read the show notes here.
