Today, Meta reached a nearly $17 billion settlement with a coalition of states, ending a federal trial regarding claims that Facebook and Instagram were intentionally designed to be addictive for children. Following this settlement, Jennifer Huddleston, a senior fellow in technology policy at the Cato Institute, released a statement:

The settlement will not only require Meta to pay billions of dollars to states but also require Meta to make certain changes to its products. This is the latest in several cases brought against leading tech companies around issues related to young people’s use of their technology and comes at a time when Congress, states, and countries around the world are debating potential regulation. Today’s settlement will only impact Meta’s specific products, although it will continue to fuel further discourse on young people and social media.

Meta, like many social media companies, had already been making changes to various platforms in response to both parent demands and policies around the world. Today’s settlement will add to those requirements. However, these changes and the settlement should not be presumed to mean that ‘social media addiction’ has been proven or that the products are inherently harmful to teens. Parents, not policymakers, remain the best people to help guide their children to use technology tools in beneficial ways, including using the features provided by platforms themselves to fit those needs.

This settlement also reflects a great deal about the potential impact of litigation even when a case does not result in a verdict. For a large company like Meta, settling may at times provide a reasonable alternative given the risk of higher fines and greater restrictions if it were to lose in court. For smaller companies, there can be even more incentives to settle even if there is a high likelihood of winning at trial due to the sheer costs and uncertainty of litigation.

To speak with Jennifer Huddleston, contact Cato PR at pr@​cato.​org.