This might be bad news for Meta, and potentially for every other social app that uses an algorithmic feed.

Today, a coalition of 42 U.S. attorneys general has filed its complaint against the company, claiming it's used addictive processes to hook young users on their apps.

Here's CNBC:

Attorneys general from 33 states have filed a federal suit against Meta in the Northern District of California, while nine more attorneys general are filing in their own states, according to a press release from New York Attorney General Letitia James' office. The states that filed the federal suit besides New York include California, Colorado, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Washington, and Wisconsin.

The action charges Meta designed its algorithms, alerts and notifications in ways that would make the company's apps take longer to leave and draw its younger users back again and again.

It also claims that features in Meta's platforms cause harm to the mental health of teens by facilitating social comparison. It also claimed that Meta violated COPPA in collecting personal information from minors under 13.
The states want the court to put an end to such practices and also seek adequate penalties and restitution.

Which could be a huge blow to Meta's business, depending on how this case is handled. Of course, Meta will most likely be able to show the court how it's running within the law, with various safeguards in place that ensure younger users are kept safer. But if this case does advance, then this could still see Meta face new penalties and be further restricted in its operations.

It's the latest in a rising trend of legal action being launched against social apps for infecting young users.

Earlier this month, the state of Utah filed legal action against TikTok over the app's use of algorithmic sorting, based on user engagement, to create an addictive experience.

Back in March, Arkansas also launched legal proceedings against both TikTok and Facebook over mental health impacts and privacy concerns.

However, in each case, a challenge will be to prove that social networks are "addictive" to the letter of the law. Much of the terminology related to addiction relates to substances, which does not apply directly.

A key linkage here is likely the triggering of dopamine, which would be the substance in question within this terminology. Social platforms are going to implement features that trigger the release of dopamine, thus leading to addiction.
There is legal precedence for this, including drugs that have activated dopamine receptors and led to negative side effects. But it's a stretch to say social media apps can cause that same level of response with subsequent user action based on algorithms and in-app incentives.

But there is an increasingly wider range of academic insight showing the negative effects of the use of social media, and presumably this body of attorneys-general has an excellent case.

Could this lead to the exclusion from social apps of younger users? Could it do away with the use of algorithms or require the platforms to provide an algorithmic opt-out, as is already the case in the EU?

It is perhaps even more plausible, but legal debate can continue for a very long time afterwards.