The Likes of Doom: A Social Media Empire on Trial

The trial of Meta, parent company of Instagram and Facebook, marks a critical moment in the ongoing debate over social media’s impact on young people. For years, researchers have sounded warnings about the dangers of endless scrolling, algorithm-driven addiction, and the insidious effects of “like” counts on mental health.

Thirty US states are suing Meta for allegedly exploiting its youngest users. At stake is not just a hefty sum in damages – $1 trillion is a staggering figure – but the fundamental operations of these social media platforms. If Meta loses this trial, it will be forced to make significant changes, including ending “like” counts and infinite scroll, as well as implementing parental verification for teenage users.

Social media’s influence on young people has been a growing concern for over a decade. Research consistently shows that excessive screen time, social comparison, and the pursuit of online validation can have devastating effects on mental health. The likes-driven culture cultivated by Meta is particularly pernicious, driving feelings of rejection and depression in teenagers.

The case against Meta centers around its use of “dopamine-manipulating recommendation algorithms” to keep users engaged for as long as possible. These algorithms are designed to be addictive, exploiting the psychological vulnerabilities of young people to hook them on social media. This is not just a matter of bad design; it’s a calculated business strategy that prioritizes growth and revenue over user well-being.

Meta has been accused of making it difficult for users, particularly children, to use its platforms less. The company’s spokesperson claims that Meta “strongly disagrees” with the allegations and is confident in its commitment to supporting young people. However, this response rings hollow in light of internal research showing that like counts drive social comparison, increased loneliness, worse body image, and negative mood or affect.

The trial highlights the contradictions at the heart of social media companies’ self-regulation efforts. Meta has touted its commitment to supporting young people, but this rhetoric is undermined by its business practices. The company’s value on the stock market is a staggering $1.5 trillion, built on the backs of users who are often exploited for their data and engagement.

The stakes are high because, should Meta lose this trial, it would set a precedent for other social media companies to follow. It’s not just about financial penalties; it’s about holding these companies accountable for their impact on society. By declaring Meta a “public nuisance,” Judge Biedscheid has sent a clear message: social media companies must prioritize user well-being over profits.

The outcome of this trial will be closely watched, not just by lawyers and policymakers but also by the general public. It’s time to hold social media accountable for its role in shaping our culture – particularly when it comes to young people. As Kaley, a young woman who prevailed in her lawsuit against Meta earlier this year, testified, “I remember feeling depressed, something I was later diagnosed with, aged 10.” This is not just a personal tragedy; it’s a symptom of a larger crisis.

The trial of Meta is a reckoning for social media. Will the company be forced to change its ways, or will it continue to prioritize profits over people? The world watches as Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers deliberates on the future of Instagram and Facebook – and the well-being of young users everywhere.