Should Gavin Newsom have blocked companies from selling Californians' sensitive personal data?

Why this label?

The reference point is Newsom's decision to veto AB 1542, the bill that would have barred businesses from selling or sharing sensitive personal information. Ward says he is deeply disappointed by the veto and that Californians should not have to worry that their most sensitive details are being sold, which rejects the veto, so we labeled it Condemned. The closest competing label is Challenged the characterization, because he also disputes the premise that existing protections suffice; he states a verdict on the veto itself, so it loses.

This label describes the statement's response within the context above.

Why this label?

The reference point is Newsom's decision to veto AB 1542, the bill that would have barred businesses from selling or sharing sensitive personal information. Schwartz says Consumer Reports is disappointed in the decision to allow businesses to continue to sell sensitive personal information, which rejects the veto, so we labeled it Condemned. The closest competing label is Challenged the characterization, because he also describes the harms of such sales; he states a verdict on the veto itself, so it loses.

This label describes the statement's response within the context above.

Why this label?

The reference point is Newsom's decision to veto AB 1542, the bill that would have barred businesses from selling or sharing sensitive personal information. Oswald welcomes the veto and calls the bill an overly broad and ill-conceived approach to consumer data, which supports the veto as the right call, so we labeled it Defended or excused. The closest competing label is Challenged the characterization, because he describes the bill as overbroad; he also welcomes the veto itself, so it loses.

This label describes the statement's response within the context above.

Why this label?

The reference point is Newsom's decision to veto AB 1542, the bill that would have barred businesses from selling or sharing sensitive personal information. Newsom explains that a categorical ban on sharing is a step too far, which supports the veto as the right call, so we labeled it Defended or excused. The closest competing label is Mixed or conditional, because he also says he supports the bill's goal; he still declines to sign it, so it loses.

This label describes the statement's response within the context above.

Why this label?

The reference point is Newsom's decision to veto AB 1542, the bill that would have barred businesses from selling or sharing sensitive personal information. The Network Advertising Initiative asks Newsom to veto the bill and proposes an opt-in consent rule instead, which supports the veto as the right call, so we labeled it Defended or excused. The closest competing label is Mixed or conditional, because the group says it supports the goal of stronger protections and proposes a different rule; it still asks for the veto itself, so it loses.

This label describes the statement's response within the context above.