What to Know About Social Media Addiction Lawsuits Against Meta, Snap, TikTok and YouTube

On Wednesday, Meta agreed to pay up to $17.1 billion to states to settle claims it harmed young users with its addictive platforms.

The settlement was a major capitulation by Meta, which along side YouTube, Snap and TikTok have faced a series of trials this year in which lawyers have accused the companies of designing their platforms for compulsive use, like cigarettes, taking a page from the playbook used against Big Tobacco in the 1990s. And they’ve argued that the companies deceive the public by marketing their products as safe.

Thousands of individuals, school districts and state attorneys general have filed similar lawsuits. The settlement could signal an inflection point for a social media industry that has largely escaped regulatory scrutiny over the harms its products have caused children.

Here’s what to know.

What are the cases about?

These cases test the argument that social media was built to be addictive, like cigarettes or casino slot machines.

The lawsuits claim that social media features like infinite scrolling, algorithmic recommendations, notifications and videos that play automatically lead to compulsive use. The plaintiffs contend that the resulting addiction has led to problems like depression, anxiety, eating disorders and self-harm, including suicide.

Cases filed by individual plaintiffs tested a novel legal theory, claiming the companies caused personal injury through defective products. The states have cited consumer protection laws and child privacy law violations.

The cases have drawn comparisons to those against Big Tobacco in the 1990s, when companies like Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds were accused of hiding information about the harms of cigarettes.

What was the first lawsuit about?

The first plaintiff was a 20-year-old woman from California identified as K.G.M. in California Superior Court in Los Angeles County.

K.G.M. created a YouTube account at age 8, then joined Instagram, which is owned by Meta, at 9. In her lawsuit, she claimed she became addicted to the social media sites as a child and experienced anxiety, depression and body-image issues as a result.

K.G.M.’s lawyer said during opening statements in February that Instagram and YouTube’s apps were built like “digital casinos” that profited off addictive behavior.

The trial lasted five weeks, and jurors deliberated for more than a week.

In March, all but two of the jurors determined that Meta and YouTube were negligent in designing their platforms, and that their products harmed K.G.M. She was awarded $6 million.

More trials will follow?

Yes, judges have bundled some of the strongest cases among the thousands of suits that were filed to act as bellwethers. A total of nine cases were expected to be heard in the series of trials in Los Angeles, including K.G.M.’s. Two have since been dropped.

A separate set of federal cases will go to trial in Oakland, Calif., at the U.S. District Court of Northern California.

The states’ settlement effectively ends the first federal bellwether trial that began last week in the U.S. Northern District of California, where California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey were seeking roughly $200 billion over accusations that Meta harmed children. The states filed their agreement with Meta on Wednesday morning in that court, which Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is expected to approve.

School districts are also scheduled to go to trial in Oakland, accusing the companies of public nuisance for the costs that schools have shouldered from social media addiction.

Separately, a New Mexico judge ordered Meta this month to pay penalties totaling nearly $1 billion in a case brought by the state attorney general for violations of consumer protection laws.

How are the companies defending themselves?

Meta, Snap, TikTok and YouTube, which is owned by Google, all argue that there is no clear scientific link between tech use and addiction and insist there needs to be strong proof that their products significantly harmed young users.

The social media companies have cited a federal shield law, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, that protects them from liability for what their users post online.

Snap, which owns Snapchat, and TikTok reached settlements with K.G.M. for undisclosed amounts.

Meta said during K.G.M.’s trial that her health issues were caused by familial abuse and turmoil. The company presented medical records to show that social media addiction was not a focus of her therapy sessions.

Meta’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, and the head of Instagram, Adam Mosseri, defended the company during the trial. The executives rejected claims that Instagram could be described as “clinically” addictive.

YouTube said that it was not a social media company and that its features were not designed to be addictive.

Both companies are appealing the verdict.

What’s at stake?

The plaintiffs in the personal injury and consumer protection cases are asking for monetary damages and design changes to the platforms to prevent addictive behavior.

To settle with the states, Meta will initially pay about $12 billion. That sum increases to roughly $17.1 billion if Snap, TikTok and YouTube also settle with the states and agree to financial penalties and product changes.

The settlement will effectively force Meta to make major product changes for all U.S. users. The company agreed to interrupt endless scrolling and to impose two-hour daily time limits on Instagram and Facebook. To avoid addictive use and sleep interruptions, the company will limit usage between midnight and 6 a.m. and silence notifications from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m.

Meta will also limit features that psychologists link to negative social comparisons, such as beauty filters and a tallying of the “like” button clicks. It will also strengthen age verification tools and parental controls.

Forcing the companies to make changes to their products could harm their broader business models.