In brief
On Friday, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court explored a lawsuit asserting that Meta intentionally made its social media platforms addictive for young users, impacting countless teenagers across the state. The lawsuit, initiated by Attorney General Andrea Campbell, contends that Meta's design features, like incessant notifications, play a significant role in fostering addiction. On the counter side, Meta defended its practices, asserting that they are within the bounds of the First Amendment. The case parallels broader national concerns about the implications of social media on youth mental health.
BOSTON (AP) — Massachusetts' highest court heard oral arguments on Friday regarding the state’s lawsuit against Meta, alleging that the tech giant designed its popular platforms, Facebook and Instagram, to be addictive, particularly to young users.
This lawsuit was filed in 2023 by Attorney General Andrea Campbell, claiming that Meta’s business practices negatively impact hundreds of thousands of teenagers in Massachusetts, who are frequent users of these social media networks.
State Solicitor David Kravitz emphasized that the claims are based on tangible features developed by Meta, which, according to the state’s research, stimulate addiction differently from issues related to content moderation. We are making claims based only on the tools that Meta has developed because its own research shows they encourage addiction to the platform in multiple ways, Kravitz stated.
In contrast, Meta strongly disagrees with these allegations. Mark Mosier, representing Meta, articulated that the company believes the evidence will demonstrate their dedication to promoting youth welfare: Our longstanding commitment to supporting young people is clear. He further claimed that the lawsuit seeks to impose undue liabilities for traditional publishing activities, arguing that their actions lie within constitutional protections under the First Amendment.
Justice Dalila Wendlandt pointed out that the essence of the lawsuit revolves around specific functions, like notifications, designed to exploit users' 'fear of missing out' (FOMO): It’s about how to attract the eyeballs... it doesn’t care about the content. Meanwhile, Justice Scott Kafker questioned the argument that the lawsuit focused solely on publishing decisions and instead suggested it pertains to the method of attracting consumer attention.
The court proceedings come amid growing scrutiny of Meta and similar platforms as they face multiple federal and state lawsuits concerning their impacts on children. More than 33 states have joined a lawsuit detailing how Meta allegedly collects data on children under 13 without proper consent, violating federal legislation.
Reports from the Wall Street Journal have previously uncovered that Meta was aware of the negative impacts Instagram has on teens, especially regarding mental health and body image, with significant percentages of adolescent girls reporting worsened suicidal thoughts and eating disorders linked to the platform.
Critics assert that Meta has not taken adequate measures to address ongoing safety and mental health issues for teens on its platforms, alleging that the tech giant opted for superficial measures instead of meaningful change.
