TikTok sued for 'wreaking havoc' on teen mental health

In a significant legal development, more than a dozen states in the United States have initiated lawsuits against TikTok, alleging that the popular social media platform is contributing to a mental health crisis among teenagers. A bipartisan coalition of 14 attorneys general from various states claims that TikTok employs addictive features designed to keep children engaged with the app for extended periods. They also assert that the company has misled the public regarding the safety of prolonged use of its platform. In response to the lawsuits, TikTok expressed disappointment and stated that it believes many of the allegations are inaccurate and misleading. The company is currently facing additional challenges, including a law passed by Congress in April that could potentially ban TikTok in the US unless its Chinese parent company, Bytedance, agrees to sell it. The lawsuit, filed in New York, states, 'TikTok knows that compulsive use of and other harmful effects of its platform are wreaking havoc on the mental health of millions of American children and teenagers. ' The attorneys general argue that despite being aware of the negative impacts, TikTok continues to misrepresent its platform as 'safe' and 'appropriate for children and teenagers. ' New York Attorney General Letitia James highlighted the dangers associated with TikTok challenges, noting that some young individuals have died or sustained injuries while participating in these activities. She referenced a tragic incident involving a 15-year-old boy who lost his life in Manhattan while attempting to 'subway surf,' which involves riding on top of a moving subway car. His mother discovered TikTok videos of similar activities on his phone after the incident. 'TikTok claims that their platform is safe for young people, but that is far from true,' Ms. James stated during the announcement of the lawsuit. The legal action specifically identifies certain features of TikTok as problematic, including notifications that disrupt sleep, disappearing videos that encourage frequent checking of the app, and beauty filters that alter users' appearances. Although TikTok has introduced tools aimed at helping users limit their screen time and manage the content they see, the lawsuit contends that the effectiveness of these tools has been misrepresented. The lawsuits were filed separately by 13 states and the District of Columbia, where the attorney general also accused TikTok of operating an unlicensed money transmission business through its virtual currency offerings. In a statement, TikTok firmly disagreed with the claims, asserting that many of them are inaccurate and misleading. The company expressed pride in its efforts to protect teenagers and committed to ongoing updates and improvements to its platform. The lawsuit seeks to prevent TikTok from engaging in such conduct and requests financial penalties. Similar legal actions have been taken against Facebook and Instagram regarding their impact on the mental health of young users. These lawsuits add to the mounting legal challenges faced by TikTok, which is estimated to be used multiple times a day by over half of US teenagers. States like Texas and Utah have previously filed similar lawsuits against TikTok, focusing on child safety concerns. Additionally, the Federal Trade Commission accused TikTok in August of violating child privacy laws. Imran Ahmed, the chief executive of the non-profit Center for Countering Digital Hate, expressed hope that the legal actions would raise awareness among parents about the risks associated with these platforms and encourage companies to modify their practices. However, he emphasized that for significant change to occur, Washington would need to strengthen existing laws. 'It sends a signal that there is growing frustration due to the lack of mechanisms available to hold these platforms accountable,' he remarked regarding the lawsuits. He noted that attorneys general are doing what they can with the limited tools at their disposal, but the judicial system's ability to hold these companies accountable remains constrained.