Technology giants Meta and Google are facing hundreds of millions of dollars in damages after US juries found their platforms deliberately addictive and harmful to young users, in landmark rulings that campaigners compare to the legal battles once fought against the tobacco industry.
Juries Find Platforms Liable for Harm
In March 2026, a Los Angeles jury ordered Meta and YouTube to pay $6 million in damages to a young woman after finding the companies had negligently designed addictive products that caused her harm. The jury apportioned 70% of the liability to Meta, with YouTube responsible for the remainder. The verdict was based on findings that the platforms were deliberately addictive and had failed to provide adequate warnings.
That same month, in a separate bellwether case in New Mexico, a jury found that Meta had misled consumers about the safety of its platforms and ordered the company to pay $375 million in civil penalties for enabling harm, including child sexual exploitation. These are the first verdicts to find Meta liable for the impact of its products on young people and form part of a consolidated group of over 1,600 lawsuits against several major tech firms.
Both Meta and Google have stated they will appeal the decisions. Meta has argued that teen mental health is complex and cannot be attributed to a single app, while YouTube has described itself as a streaming platform rather than a social media site. The cases have proceeded even as other defendants, including TikTok and Snap, settled with the plaintiff before trial.
How a Digital Detox Can Rewire the Brain
Amid this legal reckoning, emerging scientific research is providing stark evidence of both the harm caused by compulsive phone use and the profound benefits of stepping back. A study published in PNAS Nexus last year demonstrated that a simple digital detox could effectively reverse a decade of age-related cognitive decline.
The research involved 467 participants who used an app to block all internet access on their smartphones for two weeks, though they could still make calls, send texts, and use the internet on other devices like laptops. The rationale, according to the researchers, is that phone use is “more compulsive and mindless” than computer use and is more likely to interrupt social activities, dinners, or walks.
The results were striking. The average time participants spent online dropped from 314 minutes to 161 minutes daily. By the end of the fortnight, they reported significant improvements in mood, sustained attention, and overall mental health. The study’s authors stated that the improvement in objectively measured attention was “about the same magnitude as 10 years of age-related decline.”
Notably, the reduction in depressive symptoms was comparable to, or even greater than, the benefits typically seen with antidepressants or cognitive behavioural therapy. Researchers attributed the gains to participants spending more time on offline activities like in-person socialising, exercise, and being in nature, alongside better sleep and enhanced self-control.
Critically, the benefits were not all-or-nothing. “Even participants who did not fully adhere to the two-week detox reported improvements,” said one of the study’s authors, Kostadin Kushlev, an associate professor of psychology at Georgetown University. “Even taking a partial digital detox, even for a few days, seems to work.”
These findings are supported by a separate Harvard study published in JAMA Network Open, which found that reducing smartphone use to around 30 minutes a day for one week led to significant decreases in anxiety, depression, and insomnia among young adults. The researchers suggest the core issue may be less about total screen time and more about the nature of social media engagement, such as constant negative comparison.
However, the scientific picture is not entirely uniform. A 2021 Oxford University study found no evidence that abstaining from social media improved individual well-being, a conclusion that contrasts with the PNAS Nexus and Harvard research. Experts like Dr. John Torous of Harvard Medical School, who led the latter study, emphasise that not everyone is affected equally and that a key focus is identifying the most vulnerable individuals, such as those who compare themselves negatively to others online, have sleep issues, or use platforms as a coping mechanism for loneliness.
Governments Move to Legislate as Enforcement Challenges Loom
In response to growing concerns, legislators on both sides of the Atlantic are enacting or proposing stringent new rules. In April 2026, the Massachusetts House passed a bill that would ban children under 14 from using social media, require parental consent for 14- and 15-year-olds, and ban cellphones in schools. The legislation also mandates age verification systems for social media companies, with fines of $5,000 per violation for non-compliance.
This move follows international action. In December 2025, Australia implemented a social media ban for under-16s, and on March 27, 2026, Indonesia began enforcing a regulation banning children under 16 from accessing high-risk digital platforms, including YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram. Indonesia has since issued summonses to Google and Meta for alleged non-compliance.
In the UK, the Online Safety Act 2023 came into full effect for child protection in July 2025. It places a duty on social media companies and search services to protect users, particularly children, from illegal and harmful content. The law, enforced by Ofcom, requires robust age assurance to prevent children from accessing inappropriate material and mandates that companies consistently enforce age limits. Penalties for failing to comply can reach £18 million or 10% of global revenue.
These legislative efforts face significant logistical hurdles, however. Cybersecurity expert Peter Tran highlights the challenges of defining “social media” and implementing reliable, privacy-conscious age verification systems. Further concerns have been raised about the risks such systems could pose to marginalised groups, including LGBTQ+ youth, if they enable parental surveillance of online activity.
As the tech giants prepare their appeals against the multi-million dollar verdicts, the combined force of legal liability, robust scientific evidence, and tightening global regulation marks a decisive shift in the debate over technology’s role in society.