Addiction to social media among teens has become an increasingly discussed topic since its rise in the 2010s, to the point that many state attorneys general have sued META for approximately $17 billion, claiming they knowingly make their apps addictive.
Per oag.dc.gov, along with the $17 billion payout over a ten-year period, META must implement daily time limits and productivity pauses for Instagram and Facebook, nighttime blocks (12:00-6:00 am), stricter age-assurance measures (age checks), and more.
But they aren’t changing the fundamental algorithm that makes social media addictive.
Social media has positive and negative impacts on mental health. Apps like Instagram can be places where you get information about the world that isn’t heavily reported on and build positive communities with people worldwide. But the inverse is also true, as social media has proven to be a breeding ground for hate groups and far-right ideology.
Research also shows that having constant access to everyone’s life (or at least what they show to the world) and ways to further compare yourself via likes and engagement only exacerbate the insecurities and depression of young people seeking to find themselves.
According to an article released by META, “Teens won’t see the number of likes and reactions on posts — both their own and those from others — by default.” Furthermore, META mentions that “We will encourage parents to set up our supervision tools and give them new controls and insights. This includes notifying parents when a teen links a secondary account, alerting them to interactions with potentially suspicious accounts, and providing periodic updates on their teen’s usage and any changes their teen attempts to make to their protective settings.
This sounds good in theory, but since these terms end in 10 years and there’s no backup to enforce these policies afterward, the longevity of protections for teens doesn’t seem to hold up.
According to Tamar Mendelson, Professor at John Hopkins University, via publichealth.jhu.edu, “The external auditor is only in place for five years, and while they will have extensive access to Meta’s internal communications, they will have limited authority to require Meta to adhere to the terms of the settlement.” Later adding, “The auditing process also appears to be relatively private, so it’s not clear how much the public will know about what’s happening throughout all of this.”
“I don’t think this will be a positive change because they’re not acknowledging the root of the problem,” said Jonathan Smith, 19, a Columbia College Chicago student. “And only making an easily bypassable solution.” He also said that “Social media doesn’t control, but it does influence in subtle ways.”
Niya Robinson, a 17-year-old high school senior, shared her thoughts on this because she is in the group that will be affected by the changes. “It sounds cliché, but social media genuinely does not have a negative effect on me. I understand that nothing on social media is real, and that’s why it doesn’t bother me.”
But she also said META’s newfound control could enable it to censor information from teens: “We saw it when TikTok’s ownership was moved to Oracle, and it’s definitely going to happen again.” She went on to explain that sharing videos critical of the federal government now triggers repeated “check your sources” warnings, and that since the ownership change, content about Gaza has largely vanished from her feed, with the algorithm suppressing anything not written in coded language.
Zion Jones, 19, a Dillard U student, says, “America is one big corporation, I’m surprised they even care about addiction considering the tobacco industry is making kids addicted to actual drugs.” Jones also said this when asked whether this settlement could lead to META censoring certain political opinions that don’t align with them: “Yes, though it probably won’t stop anyone who actually has a message.”
