By Eva Spangler, Staff Writer
According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, over half of teens worry that they spend too much time on their cell phone.[1] Much of the time teens spend on their phone involves using social media apps, like Facebook and Instagram,[2] and Massachusetts Attorney General, Andre Campbell, wants to do something to change that. Consequently, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts sued Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, alleging that the company specifically designed features on the social media platforms to make them addictive to young users.[3]
Massachusetts argued that Meta’s platform architecture should be treated as harmful products under consumer protection and public nuisance laws, and Meta repeatedly deceived the public about the danger posed to teens by the overuse of social media platforms.[4] The complaint alleged that Meta utilized design features, such as infinite scroll capabilities and autoplay on Stories and Reels with the intent of getting young people to spend as much time as possible on the platform.[5] In fact, Meta’s own internal research revealed the company was aware that teenage brains are more sensitive to the dopamine inducing design features, and teens had a much harder time stopping excessive use of social media.[6] Massachusetts asserted Meta leadership ignored their own internal research and failed to take steps by removing the platforms’ most addictive design features.[7]
Meta claimed it is immune from suit under § 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which precludes internet providers from being liable for information provided by third parties on the platform.[8] The company argued under § 230 it cannot be held liable for the content teens view on the platform, a proposition on which Massachusetts rests its entire claim.[9] However, Massachusetts countered the immunity argument by focusing the lawsuit on the design features that feed users content, not the content itself.[10]
Alternatively, Meta argued that Massachusetts’s claims are barred by the First Amendment.[11] Meta asserted that it is a publisher disseminating, organizing, and curating a feed of third-party content and information, which is comparable to the publishing activities of traditional publishers and editors.[12] As First Amendment protections for traditional publishing also apply to social media services, Meta believes the lawsuit violates its First Amendment rights.[13]
In response to this suit, and over 30 similar ones against Meta happening across the country, the company repeatedly emphasized its commitment to teen safety. In fact, it recently introduced a new feature known as teen accounts, which allow parents to customize the content that their children consume.[14] Furthermore, Meta recently rolled expanded restrictions for users under the age of sixteen, including mandatory nudity protections in direct messages and parental approval to “go live.”[15]
Ultimately, Massachusetts’s lawsuit against Meta reflects a broader reckoning about how far the law should go in regulating the design of social media platforms that have the capability to influence the behavior and wellbeing of children and teens. If the court accepts Massachusetts’s theory, Meta and other social media companies may be forced to fundamentally rethink the design of their platforms and how they engage with young users. If Meta prevails, regulation will be largely left to legislatures and the companies own self-regulation. Regardless of the outcome, the case will play a critical role in defining the responsibility that social media companies owe to children and teenagers who have become their most captive audience.
[1] cpeds.org/media-use-and-screen-time-its-impact-on-children-adolescents-and-families/
[2] https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/teens-and-social-media-fact-sheet/
[3] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/massachusetts-court-hears-arguments-in-lawsuit-alleging-meta-designed-apps-to-be-addictive-to-kids
[4] https://www.mass.gov/news/ag-campbell-files-lawsuit-against-meta-instagram-for-unfair-and-deceptive-practices-that-harm-young-people
[5] Id.
[6] https://www.ma-appellatecourts.org/pdf/SJC-13747/SJC-13747_05_Appellee_Commonwealth_of_Massachusetts_Brief.pdf
[7] Id.
[8] https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46751#:~:text=Section%20230%20of%20the%20Communications%20Act%20of,or%20for%20activities%20unrelated%20to%20third%2Dparty%20content.
[9] https://www.ma-appellatecourts.org/pdf/SJC-13747/SJC-13747_01_Appellant_Meta_Platforms_Inc_Et_Al_Brief.pdf
[10] https://www.ma-appellatecourts.org/pdf/SJC-13747/SJC-13747_01_Appellant_Meta_Platforms_Inc_Et_Al_Brief.pdf
[11] https://www.ma-appellatecourts.org/pdf/SJC-13747/SJC-13747_01_Appellant_Meta_Platforms_Inc_Et_Al_Brief.pdf
[12] Id.
[13] Id.
[14] https://abcnews.com/GMA/Family/meta-expands-teen-safety-features-platforms/story?id=120593358
[15] Id.