In a democracy, the battle between pure and regulated capitalism is a fundamental clash of systems: unhindered free markets, or “laissez fare”, which prioritize efficiency and wealth creation, while regulations seek to protect workers, the environment, and the public good. Ultimately, democracies must balance economic dynamism with social equality to survive.
Capitalism and democracy often pull in opposite directions. Capitalism thrives on economic competition and unequal outcomes, whereas democracy is built on the principle of equal civic and political rights.
The continuous, evolving battle in democratic societies is finding the optimal balance: enough regulation to ensure the economy serves the majority and maintains social cohesion, but enough free enterprise to drive productivity and growth.
And that is no better exhibited than in some very recent court decisions where two of America’s largest tech companies, Meta and YouTube suffered stunning defeats in court in May 2026, sustaining early jolts in what could prove to be a seismic shift in how social media operates amid a new landscape of legal risk.
Both trials pit Social Media, including Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, Facebook, and YouTube against young users’ mental health.
The New Mexico and California social media lawsuits differed primarily in their plaintiffs, the legal theories used, and the types of harm they addressed. Both resulted in landmark jury verdicts against tech giants.
A group of ordinary American citizens did what U.S. regulators have so far failed to do” in holding Big Tech responsible in the recent U.S. cases
The back-to-back verdicts are the first ever to find social media companies liable for how their products affect young people.
The plaintiffs’ arguments mirror those brought against big tobacco in the 1990s, which focused on cigarettes’ addictive qualities and companies’ public denials despite knowledge of their products’ harms.
Lawyers allege some of the features that social media companies built into their platforms, such as an infinitely scrollable feed and video autoplay, were designed to keep people on the apps and make the products addictive.
Meta and Google face existential threat as nations rush to ban teen users and this is gaining momentum globally and beginning to reach Big Tech’s home turf.
The addiction verdict spoke to the core of what makes the networks popular and lucrative: their algorithms, personalized recommendations and infinite scroll, and increasing global regulations could affect how the services are designed.
The threat is building to Meta, Snap and TikTok from the erosion of the pipeline of younger users critical to lifetime-value projections, with European efforts to ban social media for teens set to be super-charged” after the L.A. verdict.
While both cases challenge the architecture of social media, the California decision is viewed as a bellwether precedent for thousands of similar addiction lawsuits.
In contrast, the New Mexico lawsuit focuses on the state policing platform operations and demanding forced restructuring to protect children from external threats.
Social media addiction is an unhealthy, uncontrollable urge to constantly check apps like Instagram, TikTok, or X. It happens when your brain gets hooked on the quick “hits” of pleasure (dopamine) from likes and notifications, making you scroll even when it interferes with real life.
Why does it happens? Well, some users enter what’s called the “Like” Loop: Every time you get a notification or see something new, your brain releases dopamine—a chemical that makes you feel good and crave more.
Social media apps are deliberately engineered to provide instant gratification. Every like, comment, and notification triggers a surge of dopamine in your brain’s reward center, the exact same chemical pathway activated by addictive substances. Your brain craves these feel-good hits, creating a loop where you constantly return to your screen for more.
In October 2021, Francis Haugen, a data scientist who worked for Facebook, turned over tens of thousands of internal documents showing that Facebook has long been aware that its platforms harm the mental health of teens and children.
However, they continued to make conscious decisions to prioritize profits over safety. The internal documents provided to federal authorities contained incriminating information proving that Meta knew its product harmed children.
Meta built Facebook’s profit model on engagement. The longer they can keep users on the platform, the more money they make from advertising revenue. Facebook has numerous choices of content to display in any user’s feed. However, it shows negative content because it is more profitable.
Facebook research shows that scrolling on social media is a self-soothing behavior. Negative content causes depressive feelings, creating a stronger urge in children and teens to self-soothe, prompting them to stay on the platform longer. This creates a vicious cycle.
The evidence Haugen courageously made public demonstrates that Facebook has knowingly designed a dangerous product that has harmed young users. This is a central allegation in the lawsuits against Meta.
In this Insider Exclusive “Justice in America” Network TV Special we “Go Behind the Headlines” in “EXPOSING META, FACEBOOK, GOOGLE, & YouTube Predatory Social Media Addictive Algorithms” ….. to examine how Brent W. Coon, and his legal team of trial lawyers and experts @ Brent Coon & Associates, are representing thousands of families against companies that intentionally designed their products/platforms to be addictive to young people using psychological tactics similar to casinos. The psychological manipulation designed by these companies caused severe mental and physical harm to young users.
The Plaintiffs allege the platforms’ addictive nature caused severe injuries, including eating disorders, body dysmorphia, clinical depression, self-harm, and suicidal ideation. Over 2,500 cases are consolidated in federal Multidistrict Litigation (MDL 3047) in the Northern District of California.
In addition to litigating high profile mass tragedies across the county for the last 35 years, BCA has tackled and won legal multimillion verdicts and settlements.
Brent and his legal team will explain their legal strategies moving beyond content-based claims to argue that the apps are “defective products” due to their addictive features, and Bypassing Section 230 Immunity, and utilizing “test cases” to establish jury-backed precedents, such as the landmark $6 million verdict in March 2026.
Meta platforms made approximately $69.7 billion in advertising revenue in 2019 alone, and the social media giant directed most of its advertising at young users.
Please contact Brent Coon & Associates for more information: https://www.bcoonlaw.com/ and (409) 222-2222