States target infinite scroll as platforms fight engagement regulation
This article discusses the legal and competitive implications of state-level regulations targeting "addictive design" features in social media, such as infinite scroll and algorithmic feeds. It argues that these regulations face challenges under Section 230 immunity and First Amendment protections, and that they conflict with competition policy by hindering platforms' ability to differentiate through engagement-maximizing features.
Key Takeaways
- Utah now lets minors sue platforms when “excessive use” of curated feeds harms mental health, and California requires companies to identify and reduce “addictive” product elements.
- A coalition of 41 state attorneys general and several school districts have sued Meta over algorithms they say harm young users.
- The article says most courts have treated amplification and home feeds as part of content moderation protected by Section 230, though some design defect and public nuisance cases have survived dismissal.
- The Supreme Court’s Moody v. Netchoice opinion said laws regulating how platforms “organize” or “prioritize” content impede editorial discretion.
- TikTok’s rise is cited as an example of competition through curation quality, while Meta’s test of reverse-chronology feeds reportedly made users bored and sent more usage to TikTok and YouTube.
Why It Matters
The immediate issue is legal exposure: states are trying to recast recommendation systems and infinite scroll as product defects, but the article says those claims face Section 230 and First Amendment hurdles. The competitive angle is sharper for streaming-adjacent platforms because personalized feeds and recommendation algorithms are described as core tools for competing on attention and curation quality. If lawmakers keep targeting those features, the article argues they may weaken the very differentiation they say they want. Watch for how courts handle claims tied to the “timing and clustering” of third-party content and to algorithms that “promote addictive engagement.”
Read full article at lawfaremedia.org