Social Media Companies Accused of Exploiting Kids' Addiction

Lawsuits in California allege tech firms prioritized profits over mental health

Feb. 4, 2026 at 10:07am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Two lawsuits in California courtrooms are exposing how social media companies like Meta, YouTube, TikTok, and Snap allegedly knew about the risks their platforms posed to children and teens, but continued to aggressively market to them, prioritizing profits over mental health. Internal documents and emails reveal alarming admissions from company researchers about the 'biological and psychological' addiction they were causing, with one calling Instagram 'a drug' where they were 'basically pushers.' The cases seek monetary damages and changes to business practices, and could lead to new forms of regulation.

Why it matters

These lawsuits represent a new legal strategy targeting not just the content on social media platforms, but the very design and marketing decisions that the companies allegedly made to hook young users, contributing to a mental health crisis among teens and children. If successful, the cases could set important precedents and lead to significant changes in how social media platforms operate.

The details

The federal lawsuit condenses complaints from hundreds of school districts and state attorneys general, including California's, alleging that social media companies knew about the risks to young users but pushed ahead with marketing their products to them. Internal documents revealed in the cases include a 2016 email from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg saying the company should avoid notifying parents or teachers about teens' live videos, as that would 'probably ruin the product.' Slides also showed YouTube was aware of minors violating policies and producing content for nearly 3 years on average before detection.

  • The federal lawsuit faced a key hearing this week, with the defendants arguing for the case to be dismissed.
  • The related state lawsuit in California went to jury selection this week, with Meta and Google continuing as defendants after TikTok and Snap reached undisclosed settlements.

The players

Meta

The parent company of Facebook and Instagram, which is a major defendant in both the federal and state lawsuits.

Mark Zuckerberg

The CEO of Meta, who is alleged to have made concerning comments about avoiding notifying parents of teens' live videos on the platform.

Previn Warren

The co-lead counsel on the federal lawsuit, who has argued the cases expose how social media companies deliberately designed their products to hook young people.

Mary Anne Franks

A legal scholar at George Washington University who has studied Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, and believes the litigation strategy is focused on the companies' own conduct in designing and marketing their platforms.

YouTube

One of the social media platforms named as a defendant in the lawsuits, which has been accused of allowing minors in violation of its policies to produce content for years before detection.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Oh my gosh yall IG is a drug. We're basically pushers... We are causing Reward Deficit Disorder bc people are binging on IG so much they can't feel reward anymore.”

— Meta researcher, User experience specialist (Internal company communication)

“If we tell teens' parents about their live videos, that will probably ruin the product from the start.”

— Mark Zuckerberg, CEO, Meta (Internal company email)

What’s next

A decision on the motion to dismiss the federal lawsuit is expected in the next few weeks. The state lawsuit in California has moved into jury selection, increasing the pressure on the social media companies as major figures like Zuckerberg are expected to testify.

The takeaway

These lawsuits represent a significant shift in the legal strategy against social media companies, moving beyond just content moderation issues to target the core design and marketing decisions that allegedly prioritized user engagement and profits over the mental health of young users. If successful, the cases could pave the way for new forms of regulation and oversight of how these platforms operate.