Do you think these social media apps are addictive?

Almost Anything can be addictive. Playing pool, watching TV or gambling. Chewing gum. It won't matter how much adjustment is made by creators of 'web pages'; we will always have some portion of the general public that manages to become addicted. I have a friend that is addicted to playing golf, poor fellow. I find an addiction to fishing far more worthwhile. (Unless there is a poker game within range.)

This has been verified research all the way back to Pavlovian theory. Also, there is the 1957 popcorn theory, by which a prompt of popcorn was sliced into a film, as to not be detected by the human eye. The reported result was higher sales in popcorn. That was referred to as subliminal advertising and labeled as fraudulent. However, repeated subliminal suggestion as behavioral modification is a scientific truth("brain washing"). Conditioning aspects of social media such as bells & prompts to give the user a small dopamine hit of gratification or reward does exist. To me, this practice states the obvious. Of course, people are being manipulated for profit! People are highly subjectable to suggestion, otherwise we wouldn't have advertising, marketing or cults.

I think they can and I used to be addicted to them so I know, but I took a healthy break and i am living my life right. :) (I own a META Quest)

Certainly the algorithms of Meta are addictive and exploitative. When will the US catch up with Europe in curtailing the spread of misinformation? Now truth takes a back seat to whatever is the most shocking (and gets the most clicks).

This makes no sense. Shall we pay and then ban gamblers and gambling, alcoholics and alcohol, body builders and steroids, any one with obsessive compulsive disorder and their chosen obsession? If so, my friend should sue Coca Cola for her addiction to Diet Coke and purveyors of chocolate and coffee better prepare. Maybe the UK should blame India for their "addiction" to tea.

You cannot blame the substance and purveyor of it for human behavior.

I am part of a group that gets together weekly for emotional support. Several of the people (all adults) are struggling with online social/media addiction although it is not a social media addiction group. So this is real not just for children but adults as well. The sites have a motivation to create that attachment, and their tools are endless feeds customized to the person, among others.

And, as a result, the loneliness (and alienation) levels the US populace has reached is epidemic. I agree, we all are at fault by allowing it to happen, to ourselves, to our children. But the companies will not end their behavior without reason stronger than maximize profit. And it is not only social media doing this: I believe we all would be happier and more peaceful if we wouldn't be exposed to the endless stream of advertisement in our lives, which is harder to avoid then social media.

The article provided nothing explaining what features about the sites (YouTube and Facebook) caused the addictive behavior, so I wrote an AI prompt and got a complete description--a summary of other news articles.

Such AI resources themselves can be addictive! But those, so far, I'm finding amazingly useful and productive.

I completely gave up using Facebook because I always found it unsettled my mental balance for two reasons that I don't associate with those cited in the recent trial -

First, simply reading and viewing the exciting stuff posted by people in my feed always left me with a vague sense that my own life is dull and dreary by comparison.

Second, when I post something and it gets 'likes' that feedback somehow gives me a sense of 'connection' that has little or nothing to do with *real* social cues and feedbacks or true 'Face Time' that is provided by real-world social contact - instead, IT IS A CONNECTION TO THE SOCIAL MEDIA SITE that is feeding me that news. Completely impersonal.

I asked a school psychologist for her thoughts following the news. She said there is no doubt that the parents of the affected young people share much of the blame for failing to monitor their kids use of the social media accounts.

That is, after all, a duty of parents: to prevent harm to their offspring.

A possible solution is for a platform to provide to user control or choice of search algorithm that would select things to view. Also, having add-free subscription option will give both the platforms and the users realistic option for legal and full featured service. If you want free service - "you are the product". If you want access to friends, chats or whatever without being manipulated, then you should pay for it and let a free market determine the price of service. Also, keeping records of interactions, when requested by either participant, will provide written records of bullying, soliciting etc. Full transparency when needed makes the law enforcement possible. Platforms owners should have a choice: provide a manipulation-free service for market price, or being legally liable for every crime that their platform facilitates.

Good ruling, obviously potentially addicting as cigarettes, alcohol, drugs. all circumscribed in some degree by government.

Ruling is not too surprising, and either are Meta/YouTube's plans to appeal. I've read about the addiction problem. Are smart phones makers partially responsible? We all could put Meta/YouTube and others out of business by shutting down our accounts. Easy. Go hiking instead.