A massive sculpture of Icarus lies in front of the Concordia Temple in the Valley of Temples in Agrigento, Sicily, on January 5, 2019. Shutterstock

A massive sculpture of Icarus lies in front of the Concordia Temple in the Valley of Temples in Agrigento, Sicily, on January 5, 2019. 

Make AI Companies Criminally Liable for Preventable Harm

The EU and US flags in front of a European Commission logo.

The EU and US Can’t Agree on Tech — or Trust

Nicklas Akers, California Senior Assistant Attorney General, left, and Deputy Attorney General Megan O'Neill exit court after tech giant Meta reached a settlement to end a landmark trial over teen social media addiction in Oakland, Calif., Wednesday, Aug. 26, 2026. (AP Photo/Noah Berger)

Assessing the Landmark Meta Settlement

Signs for company Cambridge Analytica in the lobby of the building in which they were based on March 21, 2018 in London, England. (Photo by Chris J Ratcliffe/Getty Images)

The $459 Million Cambridge Analytica Reckoning Buried in Meta's Teen Safety Settlement

The TikTok logo is displayed through a magnifying glass in this photo illustration in Ontario, Canada, on February 5, 2026. (Photo by Thomas Fuller/NurPhoto via AP)

Understanding Brazil’s $29.7 Million TikTok Fine Over Children’s Data

Three human silhouettes are depicted mid-stride, each comprising of a collage of hardware used to develop AI including circuit boards and CPU chips. In the background there is a black and grey gradient with smoke. Beneath the runners from the left, there are two rectangle panels which run across the image, one is red and the other is blue. 

To Avoid a 'Tokenocracy,' Ensure Popular Access to AI Systems

CHONGQING, CHINA - AUGUST 10: In this photo illustration, the logo of Meta is displayed on a smartphone screen on August 10, 2026 in Chongqing, China. (Photo by VCG/VCG via AP )

What Meta’s US Settlement on Child Safety Means for Europe

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg attends UFC Freedom 250 on the South Lawn of the White House, Sunday, June 14, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

What's in Meta's Teen Social Media Settlement—and What Hinges on Its Rivals

Image of Solana Larsen with text, Managing Editor Solana Larsen

Solana Larsen Named Managing Editor of Tech Policy Press

A child stands near a games stall. (Photo by Maxim Konankov/NurPhoto via AP) 

(Photo by Maxim Konankov/NurPhoto via AP)

Banning AI Toys for Four Years Won't Make Kids Safer

A yard sign expressing opposition to the construction of a data center is seen outside of a home in Mifflinville, Pa. on July 3, 2026. (Photo by Paul Weaver/Sipa USA via AP Images)

Data Center Discontent Drives State Legislation Surge

L to R: Open AI CEO Sam Altman, US President Donald Trump, CEO of DeepMind Demis Hassabis, South Korea's President Lee Jae Myung and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz attend a working session during the G7 Summit in Evian, France, on June 17, 2026. (Jeanne Accorsini/Sipa via AP Images)


AI Systems Are Getting More Powerful. The Ability to Verify Must Keep Pace.

The Capitolio Nacional in Bogotá, where Colombia's Congress is considering Bill 025 to regulate artificial intelligence.

Colombia is Preparing a Poor Copy of the EU's AI Act

French President Emmanuel Macron. (Manon Cruz/Pool Photo via AP)

France’s Constitutional Council Ruling Tests the Limits of Social Media Bans

United States Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent speaks to members of the media outside the White House in Washington, Thursday, Aug. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

What the Bond Market Disruption Means for Rebuilding American Tech Policy

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi addresses the nation from the rampart of the 17th century Mughal-era Red Fort monument during the country's Independence Day celebrations in New Delhi, India, Saturday, Aug. 15, 2026. (AP Photo)

Technocracy Won't Debug India's Education Crisis

Saline, Michigan, December 1, 2025: A sign on a rural Michigan road opposes a planned $7 billion data center on southeast Michigan farm land. Opponents say the data center could raise residential electricity rates and endanger the water supply. (Photo by: Jim West/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

What to Do With a Data Center Pause — and Unpacking the ‘Censorship-Industrial’ Complex Narrative

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, conducts the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government in the Rayburn Building on Thursday, July 20, 2023. 

How the 'Censorship-Industrial Complex' Narrative Went From Fringe to Trump Policy

Abstract image of a whistleblower amid a see of faces.

Congress Can Get AI Whistleblower Protection Right On Its First Try

Nine small images with schematic representations of differently shaped neural networks, a human hand making a different gesture is placed behind each network.

AI Audits Need a Power Test, Not Just a Fairness Score

 from US states, territories, and the District of Columbia over allegations that Facebook and Instagram harmed children is likely to shift how regulators approach online safety in Europe too.

The agreement announced Wednesday requires Meta to make sweeping changes to how teenagers use its platforms in the US, including default limits on daily use, overnight restrictions and stronger age assurance. Meta is 

 TikTok and YouTube to adopt similar measures. The settlement is still subject to court approval. 

Some of the measures Meta agreed to in the US are also being pursued by regulators elsewhere. In Europe, the UK, Australia, Brazil and Singapore regulators have spent years on initiatives to make 

, often under existing laws that require companies to assess risks and protect young people.

In this case, the promised changes are a result of litigation rather than an elusive 

“This settlement has implications far beyond the US,” said Owen Bennett, an independent tech policy expert in the UK. “If I were a regulator sitting in Brasilia, Brussels, or Canberra, I would see this as a huge opportunity,” Bennett said. The measures regulators have spent years trying to secure from Meta, he said, are now likely occupying, “a meaningful share of Mark Zuckerberg’s headspace.”

Since Meta is a US company, he said, pressure from US courts and politicians will resonate differently inside the company than rules imposed by regulators overseas. “This settlement will focus executives’ hearts and minds on child safety in a way no global rulebook or regulator has yet been able to do.”

Europe is already pressing Meta on some of the same issues through the Digital Services Act (DSA).

 Meta in breach of the DSA for failing to adequately identify, assess, and mitigate the risks of children under 13 accessing Instagram and Facebook. The Commission said Meta's existing approach did not sufficiently prevent under-13s from using the platforms.

 Meta in breach of the DSA over the addictive design of Facebook and Instagram. Its investigation focused on features including infinite scroll, autoplay, push notifications, and personalized recommender systems. The Commission said Meta had not adequately assessed the risks those features posed to users' physical and mental wellbeing and that its existing mitigation measures were not effective enough.

The US settlement is significant because it shows that platforms can change the systems that contribute to harm, rather than simply restricting children’s access to them, said Hannah Storey, Head of Children and Young People's Digital Rights at Amnesty International.

“For years, Amnesty International, civil society and people harmed by social media have warned that major social media platforms have been designed to maximize engagement and profit, while failing to adequately protect children’s rights. This settlement is significant not just because of its scale, but because it demonstrates that social media platforms can change the design choices that drive harm to children when they are held accountable,” she said.

Storey said European regulators already have tools that could push platforms in the same direction. “In the EU, litigation at this scale may not be necessary. Existing regulatory mechanisms such as the Digital Services Act already require platforms to assess and address risks to children, while upcoming initiatives like the Digital Fairness Act could go further in driving safer platform design.”

These legal instruments could become increasingly important as governments weigh whether to 

restrict children’s access to social media

“This case is a reminder that the focus should be on fixing the platforms themselves. Rather than excluding young people from online spaces, policymakers should ensure platforms are safe by design,” said Storey.

The settlement may serve European regulators as both a reference point and a challenge. Julia Smakman of the Ada Lovelace Institute said the US case could strengthen European regulators’ arguments against Meta, particularly when the potential financial consequences of noncompliance are large.

“Both regulatory action and litigation can create incentives for companies to behave more responsibly, as long as the potential financial consequences are big enough. Having a big case coming from the US itself is likely to be helpful for regulators in Europe who are exploring similar legal arguments in enforcement cases,” she said.

Since the case ended in a settlement, rather than a court ruling, it does not establish a legal precedent. Still, Smakman suggested the agreement could give European regulators a useful baseline, as long as European regulators

are not afraid to also take more stringent measures or extend protections beyond children to all users.

That tension was already visible in the European Commission’s July findings. Smakman pointed to measures advocated by the Commission that appear to go beyond those of the settlement, including disabling features such as autoplay and infinite scroll by default.

The UK is facing a different set of choices. The Office of Communications (Ofcom) is already enforcing the 

 under the Online Safety Act, while the British government 

 to restrict social media access for under-16s from spring 2027.

Steve Wood, a privacy expert and former UK deputy information commissioner, said the settlement reflects a broader shift in how governments are approaching technology companies. “It illustrates a growing international consensus on the need to hold technology companies to account, and there is significant overlap between the measures in the settlement and the aims of the DSA and OSA, as well as the accompanying guidance and codes of practice.”

For Europe, Wood said, the settlement arrives while policymakers are still considering how far to go with restrictions on children’s access to social media.

“In the EU, policymakers have some greater space to consider the settlement as they have not yet made a formal decision about a social media ban for children, and the European Commission’s engagement with Meta over DSA compliance and risks to children remains ongoing, following preliminary findings of non-compliance which closely match many of the claims made in the Meta trial,” he said.

The UK has less room to reconsider its direction. The government remains committed to a social media ban for children, though Wood said Meta’s US measures could still eventually have relevance for older teenagers who fall outside the UK ban and for smaller platforms that are not covered by it.

For regulators everywhere, the settlement provides a real-world test of what Meta is willing and able to change.

 in Oakland, California to face a judge and jury over alleged harms to children in a bellwether trial brought by state attorneys general from California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey. The trial was expected to last through October.

But on Wednesday, less than ten days after the trial began, Meta reached a landmark settlement with 52 attorneys general from US states, territories, and the District of Columbia, agreeing to pay 

 while also making changes to its platforms for teen users, including restrictions on late-night access and limits on daily time spent on its apps.

Meta denied the allegations and admitted no wrongdoing. Still, many 

 social media’s ‘Big Tobacco’ moment.

“The message to the tech industry is clear: build child safety in, or courts and legislatures will make you,” said James Steyer, founder and chief executive of Common Sense Media, in a statement. “Between devastating evidence that was emerging in the trial and pending legislation in California, Mark Zuckerberg saw the hammer coming down. Meta's decision to settle is proof that the prospect of paying real money works.”

Others are less certain it will necessarily result in meaningful change.

“Today’s announced settlement is a significant milestone in the battle to hold Meta responsible for providing safe products, but it should not be interpreted as an ‘all clear’ sign by parents and public officials,” said Arturo Béjar, a former Meta child safety leader who 

 at the trial last week. “The settlement addresses but does not solve very significant problems which remain.”

Such problems include certain design features that are not addressed, according to Jennifer King, the privacy and data policy fellow at the Stanford University Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence. These include infinite scroll.

“Ultimately, Instagram and Facebook are products intended for use by adults that were not designed with anyone’s​ health and safety in mind, but instead optimized for maximum engagement and profitability,” said King.

The settlement also contains a catch: Roughly ~$5 billion of the ~$17 billion settlement amount touted in headlines is contingent on Meta’s competitors—TikTok, YouTube and Snap—being bound to “substantively equivalent obligations” on restrictions for teen users and taking on comparable monetary obligations, according to 

. If these rivals are locked into similar rules, then under the settlement Meta will extend the block on night access and tighten the daily time cap, and will owe additional contingent payments to the states.

The settlement consists of $12 billion in guaranteed payments that can be used by the states to fund a variety of possible initiatives, such as after-school and summer programs, digital wellness and youth mental health programs, and other remedies. It requires Meta to make various changes to its products, including nighttime limits on teen access and notifications; options for teens to switch to a non-personalized, chronological feed; hiding like and reaction counts for teens by default; barring certain “cosmetic procedure” filters; expanded parental tools; and “productive pause” prompts aimed at curbing excessive use.

The settlement also requires that Meta implement an “age assurance” framework. Within a year, Meta is required to distinguish under-13, teen, and adult users and to meet certain thresholds for accuracy. 

“Certainly this will be a test of age estimation and verification features: how well they perform, how to adjudicate misclassifications, and, perhaps, how effective they are,” noted King.

These changes are expected to create safer and more intentional experiences for young people on Meta’s apps, according to Mick Tobin, co-founder and advocacy director of youth advocacy nonprofit Young People’s Alliance. “Giving teens the ability to turn off algorithmic feeds, muting disruptive notifications, and hiding like counts will help combat compulsive use and the constant social comparison that fuels anxiety and depression,” he said. “These are the design protections young people have demanded for years.”

Yet some see the settlement as putting too much onus on parental supervision. 

“The settlement puts too much emphasis on parental controls, rather than confronting the intentional design choices upstream, including default algorithms designed to keep kids from leaving the platforms,” said Meetali Jain, executive director of Tech Justice Law, a litigation and advocacy organization. “We shouldn’t have to rely on parents policing their kids. Companies should be designing products that are safe from the onset.”

The settlement resolves the claims by the state attorneys general, but leaves claims by other plaintiffs in the sprawling multidistrict litigation intact, including those by individuals and school districts.

"Meta is trying to shift the industry to strict age verification and strict controls on how kids use their services. It might work,” said James Grimmelmann, a law professor at Cornell University and Cornell Tech. “Meta is also trying to stop the bleeding from the huge number of addiction and harmful-feature lawsuits it's facing. It won't work," he said.

In a substantial section on “Accountability,” the settlement requires that a “State Committee” made up of a “bipartisan group of no more than 6 Attorney General offices” and Meta identify a “mutually approved qualified, independent third-party auditor” that would have access to the company’s personnel, systems, and “raw data; aggregated data; information; internal documents and communications” necessary to evaluate its implementation of the relief terms. The auditor can directly report any concerns to the State Committee, and if it identifies a material weakness, Meta has to develop a corrective-action plan, though the auditor’s recommendations are otherwise “non-binding.”

“Meta is going to face ongoing monitoring under an independent auditor to ensure that the protections it is required to provide under this settlement agreement are actually effective,” said Haley Hinkle, policy counsel at Fairplay, an organization that works to protect kids from Big Tech. “By asking the court to approve these design protections, Meta admits what we have long known, which is that their platform design 

“Having an independent party verify the statements of Meta is important,” said Jeff Allen, cofounder and chief research officer at the nonprofit Integrity Institute. “However, it seems that the audit reports will have to be treated as confidential by the states. This means that the public at large will be unlikely to see the actual data. Parents won't be able to decide for themselves if, for example, the platform is as safe as individual parents would like it to be with regards to putting their child in contact with malicious actors.”

What is necessary, said Béjar, are “effectiveness obligations” that produce substantially different results than the past interventions Meta has rolled out. “The level of harm … cannot be what Meta says it is,” he said. “It must be independently measured and capture the harm that young people experience, not what Meta says they do.”

Phase II and ‘Industry-Wide Adoption’

Among the novel aspects of the settlement are its provisions for what it terms “Industry-Wide Adoption” of its obligations. If TikTok, YouTube, and Snap are bound to equivalent obligations, then the settlement says Meta must make additional payments and that it will implement additional “Contingent Time Management” measures, increasing the restrictions on night usage of its apps and tightening the daily usage limitations.

There are three routes for other platforms to “adopt” the obligations stipulated under the settlement. The condition can be met if the other firms enter into a settlement, consent decree, or other commitment that is substantially similar to the Meta settlement; if they become subject to state or federal laws or regulations that impose equivalent obligations, or if they enter into “verified” voluntary compliance.

If another industry player settles with another state “for comparable claims” that are “on terms more favorable,” then the settling state would adjust its arrangement so Meta gets the same treatment. If Meta agrees to any stricter terms with any of the states, then all of the states get the same terms within 30 days.

The settlement also contemplates what happens if a new platform emerges that changes the competitive landscape. Such a new market entrant could change the calculus and cause the condition of “industry wide adoption” to collapse. A new app would qualify if it is functionally similar to Meta, YouTube, Snap, and TikTok applications, has at least 5 million teen users, and entices users to spend at least 30 minutes daily, for a period of four consecutive months.

"The settlement provides a clear off-ramp for both Google and TikTok from potential future litigation filed against them by state attorneys general,” said Clay Calvert, a nonresident senior fellow in technology policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. “Whether they choose to take it, however, is another matter. They may not agree to the feature and design changes that Meta was amenable to, or they may object to the approximately $5.3 billion price tag. That’s ultimately a business decision those companies will need to make for themselves."

Within hours after the settlement news was out, 

 to YouTube and TikTok, urging its competitors to join in making these platforms safe for teens. “We want to ensure teens benefit from this new industry standard, but we cannot do it alone,” the letter said. “These protections will only be truly effective if we work with our peers—TikTok and YouTube—to put the same measures in place.”

Kelly Stonelake, a former Meta employee of 15 years who turned whistleblower and became an advocate for child online safety, said the provisions around industry adoption could turn the settlement into leverage for Meta against its competitors.

“If it works, this stops being just a Meta settlement and starts becoming something closer to a national baseline for how social media platforms treat children,” added Stonelake.

Fairplay’s Hinkle cautioned against giving Meta too much credit for its overture.

“Meta could try to spin this as some kind of industry leadership, but the reality is that it has had all the resources in the world to better protect children from the start,” said Hinkle.

The settlement makes it harder for other platforms to argue that more stringent safety measures can’t be implemented, experts told Tech Policy Press. But there is something almost surreal about Meta positioning itself as the company calling on the rest of the industry to embrace these protections, according to Stonelake.

“For years, the industry argument has largely been that companies should be trusted to develop safety measures themselves,” she said. “Now Meta is effectively saying that voluntary action by one company is insufficient and that an industry-wide standard is necessary. On that point, I agree with them. I just think it is worth asking why it took a courtroom to get Meta there.”

According to Stanford’s King, the settlement could also have implications beyond social media. 

“It puts all of the AI developers on notice that they’re not going to have 5-7 years to drag out their kid/teen strategy,” said King. “They have to be ready now.”

Tatiana Dias is a fellow at Tech Policy Press.

For the first time, a major big tech company has been fined in Brazil for misuse of personal data. Brazil's National Data Protection Authority (ANPD) 

 on ByteDance, TikTok's parent company, for failing to protect children and adolescents.

Although ECA Digital, Brazil's new child and adolescent protection law, has 

, the case predates it, stemming from a proceeding that began in 2021. The ANPD investigated allegations that, despite TikTok stating the platform was unsuitable for users under 13, the company failed to prevent their access and improperly collected data from 8 million Brazilian children.

The fine in Brazil also came in the same week that the 

Department of Justice (DOJ) reached a $400 million settlement

 with TikTok for violating federal child privacy protection laws in the US. As in Brazil, the investigation concluded that TikTok and ByteDance, its China-based parent company, violated the law by allowing the collection of data from children under 13.

The suit, filed under the Biden administration's DOJ in 2024, accused TikTok of allowing children to create regular accounts to share videos and messages with adults and others on the platform, and of collecting and retaining emails and other personal information.

In Brazil, the original complaint to the ANPD was based on a 2021 

 that showed that TikTok was collecting a massive volume of user data even without any account registration. Using a data request filed under Europe's GDPR, the reporter got 381,264 data units recording his short-lived experience on the app.

"What I found in their data shocked me: not only my watched video history was there but also all the clicks I did within the app,” the reporter Riccardo Coluccini told Tech Policy Press. “It was possible to recreate the way I interacted with the app and also given the IP addresses it was possible to check when I was watching videos away from home.” Coluccini said he had no idea his investigation ended up in a complaint for a data protection authority in another country.

In Brazil, TikTok itself acknowledged ANPD 

 child accounts between October 2022 and September 2023. Based on Brazilian demographic data, the agency 

 that about 20% of Brazilian children had their data improperly collected by the platform.

"This creates serious risks — the content children can access, the contacts they can have — for an environment that wasn't designed for that audience," said 

Lorena Giuberti Coutinho, director of ANPD

. According to the investigation, TikTok used the data to serve targeted advertising, which is prohibited, and the company failed to demonstrate that its use of the information complied with the law.

Besides paying three separate fines totaling R$153 million (approximately $29.7 million at current exchange rates), calculated based on its revenue, TikTok and implement a series of measures:

Delete personal data of adolescents aged 13 to 18

Restrict access for users without an account

Advertising was suspended for accounts without registration

According to ANPD’s director, some of these changes 

. “The regulatory action led to concrete changes in the design of the service. It is these changes that will bring real changes in the experience of children and adolescents in the digital environment and reduce the risks to which they were previously exposed,” she noted.

ByteDance now has 10 days to appeal. In a 

, TikTok said the safety of children and adolescents is "an absolute priority" and that the company presented a compliance plan to the ANPD in 2025. "The decision imposing the fine refers to an earlier period (2021) and does not reflect the actions outlined in that plan, nor the measures voluntarily implemented since then.”

“The fines imposed by the ANPD are certainly significant and, although linked to a system that TikTok apparently claims it no longer uses, they show how the ANPD is one of the few data protection authorities willing to take on the big social media platforms to ensure that people’s rights are respected,” Coluccini says.

This is the first time the ANPD has sanctioned a big tech company for violating LGPD, Brazil's data protection law. Created as a data protection regulator, the ANPD has also become responsible for implementing the 

introduced by the Lula government this year, as well as the ECA Digital. In this expanded role, the ANPD ordered the suspension of 

Now, the case marks a new milestone in the consolidation of the ANPD's role within Brazil's regulatory ecosystem. In recent months, the agency has accumulated new powers — and it now signals its intent to use this expanded arsenal more assertively, at a moment when Brazil is trying to balance the protection of children and adolescents online with platforms' long-standing resistance to any form of accountability.

A promotional graphic for the 2027 Tech Policy Press fellowship program that includes the deadline and the techpolicy.press/fellowship URL.

2027 Tech Policy Press fellowship applications are due on September 24, 2026.

Tech Policy Press is now accepting applications for its 2027 fellowship cohort.

 in 2023, the fellowship program has supported 25 fellows from 11 countries across three cohorts, who have written on pressing topics such as the governance of artificial intelligence, tech regulation, digital rights, and the entanglement of state and corporate power. You can learn more about past fellowship cohorts and read their work 

For 2027, we intend to support a new cohort of fellows to pursue independent reporting and analysis that explore urgent questions at the intersection of technology and democracy. The year-long, part-time fellowship is designed to support mid-career journalists, researchers, and public policy professionals. We welcome a wide range of contributions, from original reporting to policy analysis.

Applicants should come prepared with a clear area of focus and a sense of how their work will contribute to informing both the public and decision-makers. We are particularly interested in projects that center communities and regions often excluded from global tech policy conversations.

Each fellow will receive a $10,000 stipend to support their work. In addition, fellows will join an international cohort for regular feedback and exchange of ideas, receive ongoing editorial guidance, and participate in monthly sessions designed to support and strengthen their work.

Applicants should have a strong background or expertise in a specific tech policy area or issue, a particular geography, or, more generally, technology and its impact on democracy or society. All fellows will work remotely as independent contractors.

Contribute (on at least a monthly basis) analysis or reporting on issues related to technology and democracy. (While topics can change after the fellowship commences, each fellow should clearly articulate a topic and why they are a good fit to cover it)

Attend a mandatory hour-long monthly cohort meeting

Attend a monthly check-in meeting with Tech Policy Press’s editorial team to evaluate progress and discuss next steps

Collaborate with other fellows and the Tech Policy Press masthead as appropriate

Meet all agreed-upon deadlines for outputs

Disclose any potential conflicts of interest

If you would like to apply for the fellowship, complete 

 by 11:59 p.m. EDT on September 24th, 2026

Cover letter (no more than two pages) that conveys what you hope to accomplish

We will host two information sessions for potential applicants via ZOOM. Registration is required. Choose from one of two dates:

The fellowship is open to journalists, researchers, lawyers, and public policy professionals who are interested in exploring the intersection of technology and democracy. We encourage applicants from the Global Majority and underrepresented communities in media. Candidates should have a demonstrated interest or background in tech policy, media, or related fields, and be committed to producing high-quality, public-interest work during the fellowship.

What are the benefits of being a Tech Policy Press fellow?

The opportunity and support to work on a pressing, underreported issue for a year

Develop a significant body of work by the end of the fellowship

Access to an international cohort of past and current fellows

Engage in learning opportunities provided by Tech Policy Press

Develop and maintain a network of sources in your focus area

Can you provide a timeline for the application review process and when selected fellows will be notified of their acceptance?

We aim to notify applicants of their status by early December 2026.

When does the fellowship start and how long does it last?

The fellowship will commence in January 2027 and last for 12 months.

Are you accepting international applicants?

Can I share additional information that is not part of the application questions?

We will only assess applications based on the information required in the application form.

A published link should direct to work that is publicly accessible online and clearly attributed to you. This can include reported pieces, policy or issue analyses, opinion articles, essays, podcasts, newsletters, or data projects. Please note that social media posts and unpublished material, such as class assignments or dissertations, will 

Will there be an interview round for the fellowship?

A select pool of candidates may be invited for an online interview.

How does Tech Policy Press plan to promote and showcase the work of fellows to a wider audience?

We publish fellows’ work on the Tech Policy Press website and feature it prominently in our newsletter to reach a broad and engaged audience. Additionally, we highlight fellowship projects through our podcast and at special events throughout the year.

Is the 2027 cohort open to those whose main contributions are technical?

Yes. We welcome applications from a variety of disciplines, as long as you can show how your work aligns with Tech Policy Press’s editorial purview.

Can we upload pre-print papers or research papers that are not formally published yet?

What kinds of projects have past fellows worked on, particularly for candidates from policy, governance, or development backgrounds?

You can learn more about our fellows and their work via the 

Are there any preferred geographic or thematic focuses for applicants from the Global South?

What are some of the criteria to reject an application?

Applications may be rejected if they do not meet eligibility criteria as listed on our 2027 Fellowship announcement.

Yes, but we recommend submitting at least one solo publication.

You can share translated work, but we also require at least one submission to be written in English.

Should the monthly submissions be exclusive to Tech Policy Press?

Is this fellowship open to candidates outside the USA who are not authorized to work in the USA?

Yes. This fellowship is open to candidates from around the world.

Is it disadvantageous to be open to working in multiple formats?

Do you have to stick to one theme, or can you write on a variety of topics?

We encourage fellows to respond to news events as they pertain to their area of expertise.

How broadly or specifically should applicants define the tech policy area or issue they want to work on?

The place where I work automatically translates our articles into English using AI. Is that a problem?

We require evidence of your own command of English.

What should we do to share a published piece behind a paywall?

You must ensure that the pieces you submit are open access.

Latest

Podcast

Recent

Our content delivered to your inbox

Thank you!

Around the globe