TikTok, YouTube, Snap May Become Next Targets of Trial Attorneys Following Watershed Social Media Trial
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS (September 2, 2026) – Meta, the parent company of Facebook, has agreed to pay an $18 billion settlement following a landmark social media addiction trial.
The trial comes after a coalition of 10 states alleged that the company misled the public about the harm caused by its platform, particularly to younger users. Meta agreed to make changes to its platform for users that are under 18 years old.
These changes include a two-hour daily usage limit that could be lifted by a parent. They also agreed to disable extreme makeup and cosmetic surgery filters and enable tighter age verification systems.
This outcome comes just a few months after Meta and YouTube lost another social media addiction trial in Los Angeles. That case was brought by a plaintiff who claimed that her mental health was negatively affected by the platforms.
Governments around the world have begun taking other more strict measures by considering banning teens from social media altogether.
Liability for Social Media Harm Caused to Minors
Under Massachusetts law, businesses have a legal obligation to use reasonable care to avoid creating foreseeable risks of injury. These principles can extend to the design of products that are used by children or adults. Courts in Massachusetts will evaluate whether a company took reasonable precautions to avoid harm or whether safer design alternatives could’ve been selected. Social media companies have typically hidden behind Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to avoid responsibility for harmful content created by third parties. However, this does not necessarily protect them from their own design choices that could potentially be harmful. Courts will take into consideration several factors when evaluating liability for any social media platform.
- It matters whether the platform in question created a reasonably foreseeable risk of harm for children or other vulnerable groups.
- It matters whether reasonable design choices could have reduced the risk of compulsive use of the product.
- It matters whether engineers designed the product to be as addictive as possible.
- It matters whether the platform warned consumers about the reasonably foreseeable risks associated with their product.
- It matters whether company owners were aware of any safety risks associated with their product.
When a social media company fails to take reasonable measures to protect children, this could be construed as negligence and form the basis of a civil claim. Consider, for example, Commonwealth v. Meta Platforms, Inc., SJC-13747 (Mass. 2026). In that case, the Commonwealth argued that certain design features within Instagram encourage compulsive use by children. Moreover, it was argued that the public was misled about the overall safety of the platform. Meta tried to have the lawsuit dismissed on the basis of protections provided by Section 230. However, the court held that Section 230 did not bar those claims because they were directed at the company’s own alleged harmful design choices.
Who Qualifies to Receive Compensation for Social Media Addiction?
It has long been understood for some time that there is an observable link between excessive social media use among youth and negative mental health outcomes. One 2019 longitude cohort study in JAMA Psychiatry found that adolescents with greater daily social media use had noticeably higher levels of negative mental health outcomes. This was true, even after their prior mental health history was taken into consideration. Eligibility for compensation resulting from a social media addiction will depend on several facts.
- Did the plaintiff use the social media platform as a minor and were they exposed to particular features that are alleged to have caused harm?
- Did the plaintiff have a documented history of psychological injury that was diagnosed and for which they sought treatment?
- Did the plaintiff have a documented history of excessive use of one particular social media platform?
- Does the evidence from the plaintiff reasonably connect their injury claim to particular features of the social media platform they are alleging causes harm?
People who have a diagnosed addiction to social media that caused documented negative health outcomes will typically have the strongest claims. The parents or family of people who have taken their own lives after developing an addiction to social media may also have a claim. Unfortunately, tech companies have demonstrated time and again that they are not fully willing to accept responsibility for all of the harm that they have caused. This is why it is so important that any social media addiction case is properly investigated by experienced legal counsel.
Getting Legal Help After Being Harmed by Social Media Addiction
We at DiBella Law extend our best wishes to all of the people struggling with addiction to social media or anything else. There is help available and light at the end of the tunnel. Tech companies have known for a long time about the addictive nature of their products and the harm caused by that addiction. Instead of taking measures to protect children, they hired the smartest engineers in the world to make their products ever more addictive and engaging to drive shareholder value. This has resulted in meaningful harm, which they must be held accountable for.
Have you or a loved one experienced psychological or physical harm caused by an addiction to social media? You may have legal recourse. Our team of experienced Boston personal injury attorneys is here to support you. We are committed to helping victims get the medical and financial assistance that they need to get their lives back on track. Whether you just have legal questions or need a free, independent investigation into the unique facts of any case, we are here to serve your needs. You’re always welcome to contact us anytime at (855) 649-2674.