Tech: Meta Really Wants You To Believe Social Media Addiction Is 'not A...

Meta went to court this week in two major trials over alleged harms facilitated by its platform. In New Mexico, the state's attorney general has accused the company of facilitating child exploitation and harming children through addictive features. In a separate case in Los Angeles, a California woman sued the company over mental health harms she says she suffered as the result of addictive design choices from Meta and others.

In both cases, Meta has disputed the idea that social media should be considered an "addiction." On the stand this week, Instagram chief Adam Mosseri said that social media isn't "clinically addictive," comparing it to being "addicted" to a Netflix show.

In opening statements in the New Mexico trial, Meta's lawyer Kevin Huff went further. He told the jury that "social media addiction is not a thing" because it's not in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the handbook used by mental health professionals in the US.

"According to the American Psychiatric Association, they don't recognize the concept of social media addiction in the same way as addiction to drugs and alcohol," Huff said during opening arguments that were broadcast by Courtroom View Network. "What you see on the screen is what's called the DSM, which is basically the official manual for recognized mental disorders. The American Psychiatric Association studied this and decided that social media addiction is not a thing."

But the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has never said that social media addiction doesn't exist. The organization provides information and resources about social media addiction on its website. "Social media addiction is not currently listed as a diagnosis in the DSM-5-TR—but that does not mean it doesn’t exist," the APA said in a statement to Engadget.

Dr. Tania Moretta, a clinical pyschophysiology researcher who has studied social media addiction, agrees. "The absence of a DSM classification does not mean that a behavior cannot be addictive, maladaptive or clinically significant," she told Engadget. That argument, she said, "reflects a misunderstanding" of how psychiatry professionals define and classify conditions. "Diagnostic manuals formalize scientific consensus; they do not define the boundaries of legitimate scientific inquiry. Many maladaptive behaviors and clinically significant symptom patterns are studied and treated well before receiving official classification."

Meta's critics have long claimed that

Source: Engadget