Social media on trial: tech giants face lawsuits over addiction, safety, and mental health

Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act is a federal law that protects social media platforms and other internet services from legal liability for content posted by users. Specifically, Section 230(c)(1) states that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider." This means platforms like Meta and YouTube are generally not held responsible for what their users post. In the current lawsuits over social media addiction and mental health, tech giants are expected to invoke this legal protection to shield themselves from liability. However, plaintiffs are attempting to circumvent Section 230 by arguing that the platforms themselves created addictive features—treating the addiction as a product defect rather than user-generated content, which would fall outside Section 230's protections.

Courts generally apply a three-prong test to determine if Section 230 immunity applies. First, the defendant must be a "provider or user" of an "interactive computer service." Second, the cause of action must treat the defendant as the "publisher or speaker" of the harmful information. Third, the information must be "provided by another information content provider"—meaning the defendant did not create the harmful content themselves. All three prongs must be satisfied for Section 230 immunity to apply. In the current social media addiction cases, the critical question is whether the platforms' algorithmic design features that encourage compulsive use constitute content "provided by another information content provider" or whether they represent the platforms' own conduct, which would not be protected by Section 230.