Apodaca: Lawsuits take aim at the powerful platforms stealing time and focus from our children

By now most of us realize that social media use by children is even scarier than we previously recognized.

We’ve heard from parents who have bared their anguish over the harm done to their kids, from alarmed mental-health professionals, and from teachers desperately trying to get students to focus.

It’s all so overwhelming, as if we are being consumed by a force that we can’t quite see or understand how to counter.

“Our heads are banging up against the wall,” said Dr. Jerry Weichman, a clinical psychologist and adolescent specialist who practices at Hoag Hospital’s Neurosciences Institute in Newport Beach.

Social media apps activate the same pleasure centers in the brain as drugs, Weichman noted.

For young users whose brains are not fully developed and lack impulse control, the results can be destructive — anxiety, depression, body dysmorphia, low self-esteem, sleep deprivation, shortened attention spans and vulnerability to online predators.

It’s a treacherous landscape that leaves parents feeling helpless because “the whole thing is designed to trap you,” he said.

But a movement underway to rein in social media’s impact on youth finally appears to be gaining traction.

Rather than putting the burden on parents to regulate their children’s social media use, we see increasing momentum toward holding the companies behind these technology platforms accountable.

This is evident in the torrent of lawsuits filed by families against Facebook and Instagram parent Meta.

Earlier this month, in a landmark trial, a New Mexico court ordered Meta to pay $567 million to address damage to youth from its platforms, on top of the $375 million in civil penalties ordered by a jury after finding that Meta harmed children’s mental health and concealed information about child sexual exploitation.

A much smaller payout was ordered in a similar case in Los Angeles. But the biggest legal battle begins this month in federal court in Oakland, where attorneys general from California and three other states are seeking a whopping $1.4 trillion in damages against Meta for allegedly designing products to addict kids — and then lying about it.

Not every case so far has been successful, but the cumulative effect of the litigation is already hitting Meta where it counts. Last month it reported $2.4 billion in second quarter legal expenses, which contributed to a 14% decline in profit.

Some lawmakers have also been getting serious about finding policy solutions. Every state in the nation has introduced at least one bill to regulate the use of social media, or other digital platforms by minors, and a growing list of nations ban or restrict social media use by children.

The U.S. House and Senate have each passed different versions of bills aimed at protecting kids online, but the final result remains unclear.

Here in California, laws have been passed that restrict social media platforms from providing addictive algorithmic feeds to minors without parental consent; compel platforms to respond when adults report content unsafe for kids; and require warning labels for minors.

But legislation working its way through the state Legislature, Assembly Bill 1709, is far more ambitious. Authored by Assemblymember Josh Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), with a long list of bipartisan coauthors, it would prohibit children under 16 from creating or maintaining social media accounts with addictive features.

Crucially, it would hold the platforms responsible for compliance, under the threat of financial penalties. It would also create a commission to establish safety standards, advise the attorney general on implementation and enforcement and propose adjustments as technology changes.

The bill passed the Assembly on a rare unanimous vote. After the Senate weighs in, it will return to the Assembly for a final vote. Gov. Gavin Newsom has signaled his support.

In an impassioned speech when introducing the bill in May, Lowenthal stressed that the intent is not to restrict speech or content, but to address the addictive design features.

“No other major industry is allowed to intentionally design products that addict children, that contribute to mental health harms and then deny responsibility for the consequences,” he said.

During a recent conversation I had with Lowenthal, he told me that his fervor is informed by his experience as a teacher, a tech entrepreneur and a father.

While crafting the legislation, he traveled to other countries, studied other policies and consulted experts.

A worldwide community is forming to address the issue and build on strategies that have proven effective, he said. “This is my life’s work.”

With AB 1709, he decided that the best way to attack the problem was to focus on the predatory features used to hook young users.

“We need to stop dancing around this and call it what it is,” he said. “This is addiction. These products were designed and tested to do that.”

He was also intent on putting the culpability squarely on the companies. As he said in his Assembly floor speech, “We are not prohibiting children from accessing social media. We are prohibiting social media from accessing our children.”

If AB 1709 becomes law, as expected, it would be an important leap forward. But it can’t end there.

The companies behind these platforms are powerful, and they are adept at staying several steps ahead. As the situation evolves, we must be vigilant.

Protecting children should always be our top priority.