- with Inhouse Counsel
- in South America
- with readers working within the Advertising & Public Relations industries
Virginia's SB 854, amending the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act (VCDPA), represents a structural shift in how social media platforms must treat minors—particularly with respect to "addictive feeds," time-on-platform limits, and age determination. Although the law is currently facing constitutional challenges, its impact on advertising delivery, targeting, and measurement is already material due to anticipated and ongoing platform design changes.
For national advertisers and media buyers, the most significant risk is not statutory fines, but campaign disruption, reduced youth inventory, optimization instability, and misalignment with federal youth-advertising standards enforced by the Federal Trade Commission.
Although SB 854 is not written as an "advertising law," advertising outcomes are directly affected because ads are delivered through feeds, targeting depends on user data and engagement and measurement depends on stable exposure and time spent.
Brands and agencies should plan now using Virginia-safe assumptions and align youth-adjacent advertising practices with FTC fairness, transparency, and safety principles.
What SB 854 Actually Does (and why it sits inside the VCDPA)
Virginia's SB 854 amends the VCDPA to impose special obligations on certain social media platforms when the user is a minor (under 16), specifically related to so called "addictive feeds" and usage limits. The law would limit minors to about one hour per day on covered services unless a parent provides verifiable consent, and will require platforms to use "commercially reasonable methods" to determine whether a user is a minor.
Why This Matters for Advertisers & Media Buyers
1. Youth Inventory Will Shrink (Even If You Don't "Target Kids"). Broad-reach social campaigns rely on algorithmic discovery, passive youth exposure, and time on platform information. This law will shake up all three.
2. Targeting & Optimization. We can expect less behavioral targeting for younger users, a greater reliance on contextual delivery and slower algorithmic learning.
3. Measurement & Attribution Will Be Murkier. Reduced exposure may lead to less clear benchmarks and with these state specific design rules (remember this law is primarily a law related to design), there could also be inconsistent performance data on which to rely.
Don't forget the FTC. There is already a robust legal framework related to marketing to children through the Federal Trade Commission's policies including COPPA and others. The FTC has consistently ruled that advertising to children must avoid unfair or deceptive practices, provide clear, age-appropriate disclosures, and avoid design practices that increase harm to minors, which apply to what ads actually SAY.
SB 854 takes a different tactic by trying to address how platforms and algorithms shape youth exposure. Like when you tell your teenagers, it's not what you say but how you say it.
Some industries will feel this law's impact worse than others. Industries such as gaming, entertainment, and even beauty and skincare, who rely on this youth market, may feel the impact more than other lower risk industries.
While legal challenges will abound (and have started), don't wait on the courts to decide which provisions are enforceable before you implement compliance programs.
How do you prepare. For brands, treat youth exposure as a risk category, align campaigns with FTC fairness principles, not just state statutes, and expect and plan for reduced youth reach.
For agencies and media buying outfits, build Virginia-safe planning assumptions, prepare clients for this new volatility and measurement shift, and document reliance on platform representations.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
