Lawsuit Information Center
This page is about social media addiction lawsuits and who is eligible to bring a claim. Our lawyers also provide the latest news on social media class action lawsuits (including the ongoing trial in California).
The problem that led to social media lawsuits is that millions of people, too many of whom are children, are addicted to social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and others. For these vulnerable users, social media addiction can be very harmful and lead to things like eating disorders, depression, and, in some cases, suicide.
Now, these companies are facing a wave of new social media lawsuits alleging that they knowingly designed the algorithms of their platforms to lure young people into harmful addictions.
Our national mass tort lawyers are currently seeking social media addiction lawsuits from individuals who became addicted to social media before age 21 and suffered severe injuries as a direct result of that addiction. Injuries resulting from social media addiction could include suicide, self-harm, or an eating disorder. This page will provide news and updates on the social media addiction litigation and our estimates on the potential settlement value of these cases.
If your child has suffered severe harm as a result of addiction to social media, call today at 800-553-8082 or contact our lawyers online.
Table of Contents
➤ FAQs on Social Media Addiction Cases
➤ How Social Media Harms Teens
➤ Legal Immunity Defense (and why it is failing)
News and Updates for Social Media Lawsuits for 2026
Below are the latest news and updates in the social media MDL and California state court litigation:
Case Count
The total number of pending actions in the Adolescent Social Media Addiction MDL-3047 increased to 3,208 as of September 2026.
Next trial Will Have Two Plaintiffs
Judge Kuhl has decided that two teenagers suing Meta, Google, and Snap will have their cases tried together before the same Los Angeles jury beginning October 28.
The companies fought the idea, arguing that jurors could confuse the evidence involving the two plaintiffs. Judge Kuhl was not persuaded that juries could not chew bubble gum and walk at the same time, finding that the differences could be managed without confusing the jury. Both plaintiffs have already settled their claims against TikTok.
Meta Settlement With States Increases Settlement Value for Individual Victims
Meta has agreed to a settlement with 29 state attorneys general over the harm to children caused by Facebook and Instagram.
Does this increase the future social media settlement amounts for individual victims? How could it not?
This litigation is expected to both compensate victims and force real change in how these social media companies factor in child safety.
TikTok Pulled Back Safety Feature for Some
The reflexive reaction many people have in 2026 is that every bad outcome becomes a lawsuit and everyone wants to blame someone else. A teenager struggles with depression or dies by suicide, and critics immediately ask why the parents, the child, or someone other than the social media company is not being held responsible.
That reaction misses what these lawsuits are actually about. No one is saying TikTok created every mental health problem or caused every suicide involving one of its users. We allege that the company built an extraordinarily powerful recommendation system, learned that it could trap vulnerable children in repetitive streams of harmful content, developed tools to reduce that danger, and then withheld those protections from millions of users to measure whether safety changes would reduce engagement.
A confidential TikTok report reportedly found that a 16-year-old user had been placed in a control group that did not receive the company’s filter-bubble protections. TikTok’s algorithm then sent the account thousands of videos involving suicide, loneliness, hopelessness, and self-harm before the teenager’s death. The report stated that the safety strategies did not apply to the account by design. This was a safety-be-damned experiment.
TikTok reviewed more than 7,500 videos delivered to the teenager during the two weeks before the death. Nearly three-quarters shared themes involving suicide, depression, emotional distress, or relationship loss, while almost 10% reportedly violated TikTok’s own content rules. The company’s internal response included the obvious recommendations to reduce the number of users placed in future control groups and shorten the length of the experiments. But why put anyone at risk in an unethical experiment?
That is why these cases are about corporate choices. A company allegedly knew that its algorithm could surround a vulnerable child with destructive content, possessed a tool designed to interrupt that pattern, and kept the tool turned off for millions of people so it could study the effect on daily users and engagement metrics.
We will not win every single one of these lawsuits. Reasonable people can debate causation in any individual case. But what these social media companies did to hook children… it makes sense they are eager to settle these cases before they get to trial.
Four Suicide Lawsuits in Delaware
Parents of four children who died by suicide have filed a new lawsuit in Delaware state court against Meta, Google, TikTok, Snap, and other social media companies. The families allege that the children began using Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube, TikTok, and similar platforms as young as age 10 and gradually became dependent on them. The complaint claims that algorithmic recommendations exposed the children to harmful content involving self-harm, extreme dieting, body image, and other material that damaged their mental health.
These Delaware cases are separate from the federal social media addiction MDL in California. The MDL coordinates thousands of federal lawsuits involving similar allegations against Meta, TikTok, Google, Snap, and other companies, but families can also pursue claims in state court when jurisdiction and state law allow it. State court cases can move on their own schedules, involve different legal standards, and create additional trial pressure outside the MDL.
TikTok Continues to Avoid Trial
TikTok is finalizing settlements in three social media addiction cases that were scheduled for trial in California state court in October. The three plaintiffs are teenagers who allege that TikTok and other platforms contributed to addiction and self-harm.
TikTok has now wisely paid to avoid having juries hear these cases. It settled before the first personal injury trial, resolved claims before another scheduled trial in July, and is now settling three more cases set for October. The settlement amounts are private, so we cannot know how TikTok valued the individual claims.
Meta, YouTube, and Snapchat remain defendants in the October trials.
Social Media Addiction Lawsuit FAQs
Are Social Media Companies Really to Blame for Mental Health Crises?
What’s the Real Evidence That Social Media Causes Harm?
The evidence is overwhelming. Meta’s own leaked research showed that Instagram worsens body image issues for one in three teenage girls. This was not an isolated finding; internal studies confirmed that social media use amplifies anxiety, depression, and self-esteem problems, particularly among young users. Yet instead of addressing these harms, platforms doubled down on engagement tactics, refining their algorithms to keep users scrolling longer, regardless of the mental health consequences.
Scientific research has further solidified the link between compulsive social media use and psychological distress. Brain imaging studies have shown that excessive social media consumption rewires adolescent brains, affecting impulse control, emotional regulation, and reward pathways. This is not just a matter of teens spending too much time online — these platforms are designed to hijack users’ neurological responses, making it difficult for them to disengage, even when doing so negatively impacts their well-being.
These lawsuits are not just speculation or legal posturing. A clear, documented paper trail shows that tech companies were fully aware of the damage their platforms were causing. Internal memos, whistleblower testimony, and academic studies all confirm the same reality: social media companies knew the risks, calculated the fallout, and still chose profit over kids’ well-being. Now, they are being forced to answer for it in court.
What Are the Strongest Cases in This Litigation?
How Long Until Victims See Social Media Addiction Settlement Payouts?
What’s the Biggest Legal Battle These Cases Face?
Big Tech will, of course, cling to Section 230 like a shield, as it has for years, insisting that it cannot be held responsible for user-generated content. The Section 230 defense has been so effective over the years that it is somewhat daunting, given the effort being put into this litigation.
But our lawyers believe this time is different. Plaintiffs’ lawyers are approaching this from a different perspective. This is not just about what users post. It is about how these platforms are intentionally designed to be addictive and harmful.
Early rulings suggest that these cases have real momentum, indicating that the legal landscape may be shifting toward holding social media companies accountable for their design choices.
Why Haven’t These Companies Fixed the Problem?
Are There Any Warning Labels on These Platforms?
Didn’t Snapchat Just Settle a Case for Allowing Sexual Predators on Its Platform?
What’s the Next Big Legal Event in This Litigation?
Why Are Schools Suing Social Media Companies Too?
Because they are overwhelmed by the mental health crises these platforms are fueling. Schools are spending millions dealing with student anxiety, depression, and suicide risks—all worsened by social media addiction. They want Big Tech to take responsibility for the harm caused. So it is not just individuals and families bringing these lawsuits. Public school districts, counties, and municipalities from across the country are also plaintiffs, and, perhaps oddly, they are all lumped together in the same MDL.
Why are these causes lumped in with personal injury lawsuits? Because at the heart of every case is a single, unifying claim: that companies like Meta, TikTok, YouTube, and Snapchat knowingly designed addictive platforms that harm children and teens, and then failed to warn users or safeguard vulnerable populations. The idea is that no matter who pays the price, whether it is a grieving family or a public school district struggling to meet student needs, the underlying corporate conduct remains the same. That shared nucleus of fact allows the cases to be consolidated for pretrial purposes, even if the damages and end goals may diverge.
Still, it is a bit unusual. Most MDLs do not combine individual injury cases with public nuisance or cost-recovery actions brought by government entities. In most mass torts, those categories of plaintiffs move on separate legal tracks. But here, the scale and scope of the harm caused by social media addiction has pulled everyone—families, schools, cities—into a single legal battlefield. And it makes some sense. These are about individual suffering, but in the broader context, they are also about how an entire generation and the systems designed to support them are being impacted by a business model that prioritizes engagement above all else.
Didn’t These Platforms Warn Users About the Risks?
Not even close. Unlike industries such as tobacco and alcohol, which are legally required to include explicit health warnings on their products, social media companies have actively concealed the dangers of their platforms. They have spent years burying internal research, misleading regulators, and avoiding accountability—all while their own studies confirmed the harm their algorithms were causing.
Again, leaked internal documents from Meta revealed that the company knew Instagram worsened body image issues for one in three teenage girls, yet instead of implementing safeguards, they doubled down on engagement tactics designed to keep users scrolling. TikTok, another major platform under scrutiny, has been found to push dangerous content, including pro-eating disorder and self-harm videos, to vulnerable users through its algorithm.
Even when confronted with mounting evidence, these companies have gone to great lengths to frame social media addiction as a “parenting problem” rather than a structural design issue. They promote features like “screen time reminders” while simultaneously crafting algorithms that override user intent, pulling teens into endless content loops. The reality is that these platforms are built to be addictive, and the companies behind them have consistently prioritized profit over user well-being. Instead of issuing transparent warnings or taking meaningful action to curb harm, they have continued to deflect responsibility, forcing families, schools, and now the courts to take action.
Who Can File a Social Media Addiction Lawsuit?
How Much Money Could a Social Media Lawsuit Be Worth?
Social Media Platforms Target Teens
Social media companies like Meta, TikTok, Snap, and Google have built dangerously addictive products that exploit children and teens for profit. Plaintiffs allege these companies knowingly designed their platforms—Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube—with features that manipulate adolescent psychology, including infinite scrolling, algorithmic content loops, and variable reward systems that mimic the dopamine loops seen in gambling and drug addiction. At this risk of hyperbole, it is pretty diabolical. These design choices are not accidental. Defendants borrowed tactics from the tobacco and slot machine industries, deliberately embedding engagement-maximizing mechanics that they knew would be especially effective on children, whose prefrontal cortex—the part of the brain responsible for impulse control and decision-making—is not fully developed.
Over 90% of all teens in the U.S. use social media platforms such as Facebook and Instagram. Studies estimate that the average teen spends about 3 hours per day engaging with social media platforms. Instagram is among the most popular social media platforms for young people and teenagers. Instagram recently reported that it has over 57 million users under 18.
The social media companies such as Meta Platforms (the parent company of Facebook and Instagram) have intentionally designed their products to maximize users’ screen time. They do this by employing complex algorithms designed to exploit human psychology. Meta and other social media constantly update and modify their products to promote excessive consumption.
Social media platforms have created user interfaces that intentionally display content that is often irresistible to young users. The “feed” features on most social media platforms continuously show young users an endless stream of content that the algorithm curates based on a data profile of the user’s interests.
Teens are Especially Vulnerable to the Dangers of Social Media Addiction
Scientific research indicates that the human brain continues to develop during adolescence. Teenage brains are not yet fully developed in terms of risk evaluation, emotional control, and impulse control. The algorithms utilized by major social media platforms intentionally exploit the lack of fully developed impulse and emotional control in the brains of adolescent users.
When teens receive “likes” on social media, their brains release dopamine, which triggers a sense of euphoria. However, as soon as dopamine is released, their euphoria is countered by dejection: minor users’ brains adapt by reducing or “downregulating” the number of dopamine receptors that are stimulated.
With normal forms of positive stimulation, the returns to neutral after a brief period. However, social media algorithms are designed to exploit users’ natural tendency to counteract by returning to the source of pleasure for another dose of euphoria.
Eventually, as this pattern continues over months and years, the neurological baseline for triggering the dopamine responses in teen users increases. Teens then continue to use Facebook and Instagram, not for enjoyment, but to feel a sense of normalcy. When teens attempt to stop using social media products, they experience the universal symptoms of withdrawal from any addictive substance, including anxiety, irritability, insomnia, and craving.
Addictive use of social media by minors is psychologically and neurologically analogous to addiction to internet gaming disorder. Gaming addiction is recognized as a mental disease by the World Health Organization and other public health agencies.
Social Media Companies Profit From Teen Advertising
To keep teens engaged, these platforms utilize sophisticated technology and algorithms designed to maximize user interaction. Notifications, personalized content feeds, and tailored advertising are all engineered to drive users back onto the app and keep them scrolling.
This approach creates a highly addictive experience, making it challenging for vulnerable teen users to disconnect and avoid constant online pressure and comparison. Studies increasingly link these design choices to serious impacts on teens’ self-esteem, sleep, and mental health, with prolonged use shown to exacerbate anxiety, depression, and body image issues.
A former Facebook employee, Frances Haugen, testified before Congress, providing a much clearer understanding of how the platform operates. She said that executives were aware of the potential harm to teens. But they prioritized profits over safety. This is the theme of every single social media lawsuit in this litigation.
Haugen presented internal research showing that the platform not only failed to protect young users but also actively designed features that worsened their mental health. This testimony underscored the need for accountability, as it highlighted the industry’s continued pattern of exploiting teens for revenue, all while downplaying or outright ignoring the risks of social media addiction and psychological harm.
How Social Media Addiction Can Harm Young People
A rapidly growing body of scientific research (including internal research by the social media companies themselves) has shown that addiction to social media can result in severe emotional harm and potentially physical harm for teens. This research, coupled with what we know about what these companies did to foster addiction, drives the social media lawsuit.
In 2018, a study published by the National Center for Biotechnology Information found a clear correlation between time spent on social media platforms and mental health issues, depression, and social ideation among adolescents. The study findings found that excessive use of social media correlated to an increase in self-harm behavior.
In 2021, the results of a long-term study by BYU on the impact of social media on teens found that teenage girls who used social media for 2-3 hours a day had a clinically higher risk for suicide. Research performed by the social media companies themselves confirmed the harm caused by these platforms. According to an article in the Wall Street Journal, Facebook performed internal research that found significant mental health issues related to Instagram use by teenage girls, including suicidal thoughts and eating disorders.
Lawsuits Against Social Media Companies for Harm Caused by Teen Addiction
Over the past year, this litigation alleging that social media platforms are fueling teen addiction and causing serious harm has really taken off. Adolescents and their parents are filing these suits, and the focus has largely been on Meta’s Instagram and Facebook platforms.
At the heart of these cases is the claim that social media companies intentionally designed their products to be addictive, particularly for younger users, without adequate warnings or safeguards. Plaintiffs argue that these platforms were not just engaging but engineered to keep teens hooked, creating a risk that the companies failed to disclose.
The alleged injuries are as devastating as they are personal. Plaintiffs are seeking damages for physical and emotional harm, including self-injury, eating disorders, and in the most tragic cases, suicide. These lawsuits are not about content moderation or parental control—they are about holding companies accountable for the addictive architecture built into the platforms themselves.
Social Media Grooming Lawsuits
Social media grooming lawsuits against platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and others involve legal actions taken by victims or their families against these companies. There are also lawsuits against Robolox, which is not a regular player in social media lawsuits. The core of these claims, which usually involve sex abuse or exploitation, is that social media platforms failed to protect minors from being groomed by predators.
The basis of these lawsuits often centers around several key legal arguments that plaintiffs’ social media lawyers believe are very strong.
First, plaintiffs argue that social media platforms were negligent in failing to implement adequate safeguards to protect minors from online grooming. This includes insufficient moderation of content, lack of effective reporting mechanisms, and inadequate measures to verify the age of users. By not taking these precautions because it would decrease their already excessive profits, the platforms are accused of allowing predators to exploit their services to contact and groom children.
Additionally, some lawsuits frame the issue as a product liability claim, asserting that the design of the platform is inherently dangerous or defective because it enables predators to contact and groom children. This perspective treats the platform itself as a product that should be reasonably safe for its intended use, which includes safeguarding vulnerable users from harm.
Furthermore, platforms may be accused of breaching their duty to provide a safe environment for their users. This duty is especially important for minors, who are particularly vulnerable to online predators. By failing to ensure a safe online space, the platforms woefully fail in their responsibility to their users and to the general public.
Blocking Parents from Monitoring Their Children
A key argument in many of the lawsuits against social media companies is their failure to provide adequate tools for parents to monitor and control their children’s use of platforms. Plaintiffs’ social media addiction lawyers argue that social media companies have not only designed their products to be addictive but have also neglected to implement safeguards that would allow parents to intervene effectively.
While social media platforms offer features like screen time limits and content filters, these tools are often insufficient and difficult to navigate. As a result, parents are left with limited ability to protect their children from the harmful effects of social media addiction, including exposure to harmful content, online grooming, and cyberbullying. The failure to provide meaningful parental controls is seen as a form of negligence by these companies, especially given their knowledge of the risks posed to young users.
In the lawsuits, plaintiffs argue that social media companies are not only aware of these deficiencies but have deliberately chosen not to address them, prioritizing profit and user engagement over the safety of teen users. This lack of accountability, combined with the documented harm caused to minors, forms a central argument in the claims against platforms like Meta and Snap.
Social Media Companies May Claim Legal Immunity
In the context of social media addiction lawsuits, however, this broad immunity may not apply. While §230 shields platforms like Facebook from liability related to harm caused by user-generated content, it does not protect them from claims involving the design of their own technology, such as their algorithms. That is the key to these lawsuits and how our social media addiction lawyers believe we will survive the onslaught of efforts to dismiss these lawsuits.
These algorithms, which are designed to maximize user engagement and retention, are at the heart of the social media addiction lawsuits. Plaintiffs’ lawsuits allege that it is not the content posted by other users, but the addictive nature of the platforms themselves—shaped by the company’s own algorithms—that is causing harm. As such, the liability being pursued in these cases targets the companies’ own actions and designs, rather than the actions of third-party users, making the §230 inapplicable.
Will the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit Be Successful?
The lawsuits seeking to hold social media companies liable for harm caused by addiction to their platforms are clearly unique and, in many ways, unprecedented. None of these cases has gone to trial or been settled. These cases involve somewhat novel tort claims, and the plaintiffs will face a tough uphill battle on many fronts.
One of the most significant pitfalls for these social media addiction lawsuits will be proving causation. First, the plaintiffs will need to scientifically prove that there was a physical addiction to the platform. Studies on this have been conducted, but it’s not certain whether these would meet the level of academic scrutiny necessary to be admissible in court.
Even if the plaintiffs can prove that there was an actual addiction to a social media platform, they will also need to prove that the addiction was “more likely than not” the cause of the physical harm suffered by the teen. In a suicide case, this might be very difficult because social media addiction will likely be just one of several contributing causes.
Statute of Limitations and Jurisdiction
Each state sets a legal deadline, known as the statute of limitations, for filing a lawsuit. If that deadline passes, even a strong case involving mental health harm, self-injury, or wrongful death can be dismissed. These deadlines vary depending on the state and the type of claim, such as personal injury or wrongful death. The MDL might be in California, but that court generally uses the state laws where the injuries occurred.
In many cases involving minors, the clock does not start until the child turns eighteen… but this in not true in every state. Some states also allow extra time if the injury was not immediately discovered, although courts often dispute when a plaintiff “should have known” the cause of harm. These rules can be especially important in social media addiction cases, where the harm may have developed gradually.
Jurisdiction also matters. Where the case is filed will determine which laws apply, what claims are allowed, and whether the case remains in state court or is transferred to federal court. Some social media lawsuits have been consolidated into multidistrict litigation, which may affect how and where new claims are filed.
Because these procedural issues can determine whether a case is allowed to proceed, it is important to evaluate both timing and venue early. Once a claim is time-barred, there is usually no way to revive it.
The best path? Call a lawyer and find out what your deadline to file might be.
Social Media Addiction Lawsuit Settlement Amounts
As social media addiction lawsuits against companies like Meta (Facebook and Instagram) and Snap Inc. (Snapchat) move forward, predicting settlement amounts is still speculative, as none of these cases have reached trial or settlement yet.
Still, if the suits proceed as well as most plaintiffs’ lawyers believe they will, our lawyers can speculate about potential settlement amounts these social media companies will ultimately pay based on the nature of the allegations and historical precedents from other major liability cases. Keep in mind that these are just projections, and they assume that the plaintiffs will successfully overcome key legal challenges, including proving causation and harm.
High-Value Settlements: Teen Suicide Cases
The highest potential settlement amounts are expected in cases involving teen suicides linked to social media addiction. Wrongful death claims, particularly those involving teenagers, typically result in higher settlement values due to significant emotional and financial losses. If these cases go as well as most plaintiffs’ lawyers hope, the average suicide settlement amounts could range from $900,000 to $3 million per case. As for trial, it would not be surprising to see compensation verdicts in the tens of millions even before we get to punitive damages.
Factors driving these higher settlement values include:
- Emotional Impact: These are incredibly tragic cases. The profound emotional toll on families who lose a child, especially under tragic circumstances involving suicide, could lead to substantial awards.
- Corporate Responsibility: If plaintiffs successfully demonstrate that companies like Meta were aware of the dangers posed to teens and chose not to act, punitive damages could significantly increase the risk these companies face at trial and that will impact settlement amounts.
- Public Pressure: The growing societal concern about the mental health impacts of social media on youth may push companies to settle quickly to avoid public backlash. The politics and the optics in his litigation definitely lean the plaintiffs’ way.
Moderate Settlements: Severe Injuries and Mental Health Disorders
For cases involving severe but non-fatal injuries, such as self-harm, eating disorders, or long-term mental health issues, settlement payouts are likely to be lower than wrongful death cases but could still be substantial. If these cases proceed favorably for plaintiffs, settlements could be in the range of $300,000 to $900,000, depending on the severity and duration of the harm.
- Eating Disorders: Lawsuits involving severe eating disorders (such as anorexia or bulimia) that are linked to social media use may result in settlement payouts between $300,000 and $900,000 if plaintiffs can show ongoing physical and psychological harm.
- Self-Harm: Claims involving self-mutilation or severe self-harm could see similar settlement ranges, particularly if the cases involve long-term emotional trauma and visible scars.
- Mental Health Disorders: Cases of severe anxiety, depression, or related mental health issues would likely fall within a slightly lower range, around $150,000 to $450,000, unless plaintiffs can prove the harm was directly tied to the addictive nature of social media.
Low-Value Settlements: Mild to Moderate Injuries
Settlements will likely be lower for cases involving milder injuries, such as temporary mental health issues or emotional distress. However, if the plaintiffs’ lawyers succeed in establishing a connection between social media use and these issues, settlements may range from $30,000 to $150,000, especially if no ongoing treatment is required.
What Are the Major Injuries in a Social Media Lawsuit?
Let’s look at the type of injuries that the social media lawsuits involve:
- Addiction/Compulsive Use: Social media platforms are designed to be engaging and can lead to compulsive use or addiction. This is often due to the platforms’ use of algorithms that encourage prolonged engagement, potentially leading to neglect of other activities and responsibilities.
- Eating Disorders:
- Anorexia: Exposure to content promoting unrealistic body standards can contribute to anorexia, where individuals develop an obsessive fear of gaining weight and severely limit their food intake.
- Bulimia: Similarly, exposure to certain content on social media can contribute to bulimia, characterized by periods of overeating followed by purging due to body image issues.
- Binge Eating: Social media can also influence binge eating behaviors, where individuals consume large amounts of food quickly, often triggered by stress or emotional content online.
- Other Eating Disorders: Various other eating disorders can be influenced by the content and interactions on social media, including exposure to diet culture and body shaming.
- Depression: Constant comparison with others, cyberbullying, and exposure to harmful or distressing content on social media can contribute to feelings of sadness, hopelessness, and depression.
- Anxiety: Overuse of social media can lead to heightened anxiety stemming from social comparison, fear of missing out (FOMO), and exposure to anxiety-inducing content.
- Self-Harm:
- Suicidality: Exposure to content related to suicide or being part of online communities that discuss self-harm can increase suicidal thoughts, particularly in vulnerable individuals. This and sex abuse are the worst injuries our social media attorneys are seeing in these lawsuits, and surviving family members certainly may be eligible for a lawsuit. We discuss this more just below.
- Attempted Suicide: There can be an influence on suicide attempts due to the glorification or normalization of such actions in certain social media circles.
- Death by Suicide: Tragically, social media can play a role in some individuals’ decisions to take their own lives, especially when they are exposed to suicidal content or cyberbullying.
- Other Self-Harm: This includes various forms of self-injurious behavior, which might be influenced by content seen on social media or as a coping mechanism for the distress experienced due to online interactions.
- Child Sex Abuse: The presence of predators on social media and the sharing of explicit content can lead to cases of child sexual abuse.
- CSAM Violations (Child Sexual Abuse Material): The distribution and access to illegal child sexual abuse material can be facilitated through specific platforms, contributing to this serious issue.
- Other Physical Injuries: This can include a range of physical injuries that may be indirectly caused by social media use, such as accidents occurring while being distracted by social media (we add this for completeness – our lawyers are not handling distracted claims)
Social Media Suicide Lawsuits
It is no accident that users struggling with their mental health get bombarded with posts about suicide and self-harm. Social media platforms use algorithms designed to keep users engaged—even if that means funneling vulnerable individuals into content that glorifies suicide. Once a user interacts with even one post related to mental health struggles, the platform doubles down, serving up more and more potentially harmful content. For some at-risk individuals, this is not just irresponsible. It is deadly.
Here are some ways in which social media can play a role:
- Cyberbullying and Harassment: Social media companies know that cyberbullying is rampant on their platforms, and they know the harm it causes. Adolescents and young adults, already vulnerable, face relentless online harassment that isolates them, drives them into depression, and, in too many cases, leads to suicide. And what do these billion-dollar tech giants do to stop it? Practically nothing. They offer weak reporting mechanisms that rarely result in meaningful action, allowing harmful content to fester. Meanwhile, they rake in ad revenue from continued engagement.
- Exposure to Suicidal Content: Exposure to posts, images, or videos discussing or glorifying suicide can influence vulnerable individuals, particularly if they are already struggling with mental health issues.
- Social Comparison and Low Self-esteem: Every day, teenagers and young adults scroll through curated, filtered versions of other people’s lives, leading to an epidemic of self-doubt, body image issues, and low self-esteem. The platforms know this. Studies have confirmed it. And yet, they continue to promote influencer-driven content that sets impossible beauty and lifestyle standards because it generates clicks, engagement, and—most importantly—profits.
- Isolation and Lack of Real Connection: Excessive time spent on social media can lead to decreased face-to-face interactions and a sense of social isolation, which is a known risk factor for depression and suicide.
- Online Echo Chambers: Rather than removing harmful content, social media companies allow toxic online communities to thrive—spaces where self-harm, disordered eating, and suicidal ideation are normalized and even encouraged. These echo chambers prey on the most vulnerable, pushing them further into dangerous behaviors. (And because engagement equals profit, the companies have no real incentive to shut them down.)
- Sleep Disruption: Overuse of social media, especially before bedtime, can disrupt sleep patterns. Poor sleep is linked to a variety of mental health issues, including an increased risk of depression and suicidal thoughts.
- Triggering Content: A vulnerable user searching for help is just as likely to stumble upon content that worsens their mental health as they are to find actual support. Social media platforms fail to provide meaningful safeguards against triggering content, and their content moderation efforts are laughably inadequate. Time and again, they choose to prioritize engagement over safety, with deadly consequences.
Who Are the Social Media Defendants?
Here are the key social media defendants:
ETA Entities
- Meta Platforms, Inc., formerly known as Facebook, Inc.
- Instagram, LLC
- Facebook Payments, Inc.
- Siculus, Inc.
- Facebook Operations, LLC
TikTok Entities
- ByteDance Ltd.
- ByteDance Inc.
- TikTok Ltd.
- TikTok LLC.
- TikTok Inc.
Snap Entity
- Snap Inc.
Google Entities
- Google LLC
- YouTube, LLC
Lawsuits against Facebook/Meta
Meta, the company responsible for operating and designing Facebook and Instagram, two of the world’s most popular social media platforms, is probably the number one defendant in this litigation. In 2022, the staggering user statistics revealed that Instagram had two billion active monthly users worldwide, while Facebook boasted almost three billion monthly active users. While these numbers showcase Meta’s enormous reach, they also underscore the extensive damage suffered by plaintiffs and other adolescent users of these platforms.
Meta Knew What It Was Doing
Meta’s own internal documents reveal that it was well aware of the negative consequences of what Facebook and Instagram were doing to children. It acknowledged that children under 13 were using Instagram despite being prohibited from doing so. Furthermore, Meta recognized that its Facebook and Instagram – especially Instagram, obviously for kids – platforms were addictive, with teenagers feeling pressured to engage with them constantly. The company admitted that its existing tools did not limit users’ screen time.
Addictive use of Instagram was acknowledged to lead to significant problems. Still, the company is accused of what so many big lawsuits are about – it put growth and profits over the well-being of children. Despite being warned about issues related to problematic use, bullying, harassment, and the impact on young users, Meta failed to take substantial action. Instead, it maintained the status quo, citing concerns that addressing these problems might negatively affect the company’s growth.
Pretending to Try to Solve the Problem
Meta allegedly tried to help the problem with mere public relations gestures, with internal documents suggesting they were not taken seriously. The company provided tools such as “time spent” features to parents and kids, even though it knew that the data presented by these tools was inaccurate.
Additionally, Meta is accused of engaging in a campaign to discredit research about the addictive nature of its products, calling it “completely made up.” In contrast, its internal research highlighted the unique dangers posed to young users.
Despite this knowledge, Meta’s failure to protect child users of Instagram and Facebook has drawn significant attention. Instead of addressing the problems caused by its platforms, the company cut funding for its mental health team and deprioritized addiction-related issues. These actions have raised concerns about the company’s commitment to user safety.
How They Did It
Meta’s platforms deploy recommendation algorithms fueled by extensive data collection. These algorithms are accused of promoting usage patterns and frequencies harmful to adolescents. Features that exploit children’s need for validation and encourage harmful loops of repetitive usage are among the key concerns raised.
Furthermore, the plaintiffs argue that despite having the capability, Meta failed to implement effective mechanisms to limit children’s use of these products. The lack of adequate parental controls and facilitation of unsupervised use are also significant issues.
These platforms are meticulously crafted to increase user engagement. Every detail, from icon colors to notification timings, is strategically designed. This extensive engineered approach aims to maximize the length and frequency of user sessions.
The Algorithm Is a Problem
One of the core issues in social media addiction lawsuits is the way algorithms on platforms like Facebook and Instagram manipulate users’ behavior, particularly young people. Remember when Facebook’s news feed was chronological, showing posts in the order they were shared? But in 2009, Facebook switched to an engagement-based ranking algorithm, and Instagram followed suit in 2016, replacing its chronological feed with a similar engagement-driven model.
The goal of these algorithmic changes was to increase user engagement, keeping people on the platform longer by showing them content that would provoke the most reactions, whether through likes, shares, or comments. This worked for Meta—their profits soared. But it is now a central point of contention in lawsuits focusing on social media addiction.
In 2018, Meta introduced the “meaningful social interaction” (MSI) algorithm, which it claimed would promote more meaningful connections by prioritizing content from friends and family. Meta argued that this change would reduce passive consumption, such as mindlessly scrolling through content without engaging. However, plaintiffs’ social media addiction lawyers have aggressively challenged this claim, arguing that the MSI algorithm does far more harm than good.
Plaintiffs’ lawyers argue that the MSI algorithm amplifies negative interactions instead of fostering meaningful connections. Internal research from Meta and independent studies have revealed that the algorithm tends to prioritize emotionally charged content, often amplifying posts that provoke anger, fear, or sadness. This is a bad idea for adults and an awful way to manipulate children. Our lawsuits assert that Meta, in its quest to drive user engagement, knowingly exposed vulnerable young users to harmful content, including cyberbullying, unrealistic body image portrayals, and self-harm.
On Instagram, in particular, the algorithm’s effect has been devastating, especially for teenagers. Instagram’s visual nature, combined with the platform’s algorithm, often pushes content that features unrealistic body standards or sensationalized trends.
Plaintiffs argue that this content leads to damaging comparisons, fostering feelings of inadequacy, depression, and anxiety, particularly in young girls. On one level, this is life, right? Plaintiffs’ lawyers get that. But it is the manipulation of children with Instagram’s Explore feature, which curates content based on user interactions, that intentionally reinforces these harmful behaviors.
What you get from these algorithms is a dangerous feedback loop. Users who engage with certain types of content—whether related to fitness, body image, or mental health—are served more of the same content, often in more extreme forms. This algorithmic echo chamber traps vulnerable users in cycles of negative thought patterns, exacerbating issues like eating disorders, depression, and social isolation.
Meta argues that its algorithms are designed to improve user experience, but social media addiction lawsuits present a different reality. By prioritizing engagement metrics like likes, shares, and comments, these lawsuits allege that these algorithms actively harm users, particularly teenagers, by pushing emotionally charged and sometimes dangerous content. Rather than offering balanced or supportive content, the platforms focus on material that keeps users hooked, resulting in addiction-like behaviors and worsening mental health.
Contact Us About a Social Media Addiction Lawsuit
If you or your child has suffered severe physical or emotional harm as a result of addiction to social media, contact our lawyers today at 800-553-8082 or get a free online consultation.