See Unsee summary
Joseph Gordon-Levitt has spoken out sharply against California Governor Gavin Newsom for vetoing a proposed bill that aimed to better protect minors from potentially harmful interactions with AI chatbots. The actor accuses Newsom of backing down under pressure from big tech interests, reigniting the debate about the role of AI in young people’s lives.
A veto that stirs debate
The bill, which sought to prohibit AI chatbots from engaging in sexually explicit conversations or encouraging self-harm when interacting with users under 18, was passed by the California legislature earlier this year. Its goal was simple: keep powerful new technologies from exposing minors to dangerous or inappropriate content.
But Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed it. In his official statement, Newsom claimed the bill was overly broad and risked banning any use of generative AI for youth altogether. Instead, he opted to sign a less restrictive law requiring companies to clearly inform users when they’re speaking to a bot and to implement procedures to prevent content that promotes self-harm.
From a legal perspective, I understand wanting to avoid overregulation of emerging technologies. But when those technologies are likely to shape the lives (and mental health) of an entire generation, shouldn’t we lean toward caution? To read Gwen Stefani headlines magical 2025 Disney Christmas Parade
Gordon-Levitt’s reaction: direct and pointed
Known for his thoughtful presence both onscreen and off, Joseph Gordon-Levitt didn’t mince words. In a video posted on social media Wednesday, he criticized Newsom’s decision as cowardly. “While he signed this do-nothing bill, he vetoed a good bill that really would have held Big Tech’s feet to the fire,” he said, visibly frustrated. “He’s too scared to sign it.”
For him, this isn’t just a political debate. It’s about accountability—about protecting creatives and users alike from the unchecked power of tech giants. And his concern isn’t coming out of nowhere.
Gordon-Levitt pointed out the surge of new Super PACs backed by companies like Meta, Google, and OpenAI. These political groups are designed to influence U.S. candidates before they even take a stand on AI regulation. The actor suspects Newsom, often whispered about as a potential presidential hopeful, may be trying to avoid making enemies in Silicon Valley.
It’s hard not to be cynical when we see a well-structured bill intended to help kids get replaced by what feels like a PR move.
The deeper risk: creativity at stake
This isn’t Gordon-Levitt’s first time calling out Big Tech. In July, he wrote an op-ed in The Hollywood Reporter, decrying how large companies use creative content to train AI models without compensating or even crediting the original artists. To read Toho expands into Europe with bold anime distribution moves
One sentence from that piece still resonates: “These tech products are not people.” It’s a reminder that AIs don’t replace the spark humans bring to storytelling, to music, to design. Yet, the line between tool and author is getting increasingly blurry, especially when companies claim copyright protection over machine-generated work.
I get where he’s coming from. As a writer, it’s unsettling to feel like our words, stories, and ideas could eventually be swallowed into a digital machine without our say or share.
OpenAI and shifting norms
The timing of Gordon-Levitt’s statement is no coincidence. Just days before, OpenAI’s CEO Sam Altman announced a new policy: ChatGPT will now allow sexually explicit content, as long as it’s restricted to verified adult users. The update comes with improved age-gating measures, but it adds fuel to the broader concern—how do we really ensure younger users aren’t exposed to stuff they shouldn’t see?
For a parent, or even just someone who worries about the mental wellness of teens online, that’s a pretty serious question.
What’s at stake:
- The mental health of young users engaging daily with AI.
- Legal ownership and fair use of creative works in training AI systems.
- Political independence in an era where tech lobbies are gaining power.
- The ethical limits of what AI should be allowed to say or shape.
Gordon-Levitt isn’t a politician. But he’s a voice that carries weight because he’s both part of the tech conversation (through his platform HitRecord) and not afraid to be emotional about it. That sincerity is rare and worth listening to—even if it makes us uncomfortable.
It’s tempting to see the world of AI as just another digital toolset evolving too fast to follow. But when people like Gordon-Levitt speak with this level of urgency, it’s probably time we pay closer attention.
