The recent rejection of TikTok’s attempt to dismiss a lawsuit filed by New Hampshire marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over tech giants’ responsibility towards their youngest users. At its core, this case highlights a troubling trend: platforms deliberately designing features that promote addiction, particularly targeting children and teens. While TikTok and other companies defend their safety measures, the court’s decision underscores the importance of examining the fundamental ethics behind app design. It isn’t merely about content moderation or superficial safety tools; it’s about whether these platforms are consciously or negligently prioritizing profit over the well-being of their users, especially vulnerable youth.
The legal action centers on allegations that TikTok has embedded manipulative features intended to keep children engaged for extended periods of time. This isn’t accidental; it’s a calculated strategy to maximize user engagement, increase ad exposure, and boost e-commerce sales via TikTok Shop. What’s most concerning is how these designs exploit psychological vulnerabilities—fostering compulsive behaviors by leveraging intermittent rewards, endless scrolls, and algorithmic reinforcement. These tactics are not unique to TikTok; similar accusations have been lodged against other platforms like Meta and Snapchat, revealing a wider industry pattern of prioritizing engagement over mental health.
<...>
Ethical Failures and Business Incentives
The core issue goes beyond individual lawsuits or regulatory scrutiny; it touches on systemic failures within the business models of social media platforms. Many of these companies have embedded addictive features into their products—often justified as “user engagement” or “personalization”—but what lies underneath is a ruthless pursuit of profit. The more time users spend on these apps, particularly impressionable children, the more lucrative the platform becomes through advertising and e-commerce. This creates a perverse incentive to design features that trap users in addictive loops.
The controversy surrounding TikTok underscores a broader moral question: should technology companies be allowed to deploy manipulative tactics that exploit cognitive vulnerabilities? The fact that TikTok claims to offer safety tools such as screen time limits and parental controls, but still faces accusations of fostering addiction, suggests a disconnect between corporate promises and actual practice. These features, even when present, seem secondary to the overarching goal of maximizing user engagement, often at the expense of user well-being.
<...>
The Imperative for Regulatory and Cultural Shift
While legal battles and lawsuits are vital for accountability, they are not sufficient to instigate meaningful change. The broader challenge lies in fostering an industry-wide culture that values ethical design. Current regulations, including attempts like the Kids Online Safety Act, are well-intentioned but stalled or insufficient. As a society, we need to reframe the conversation around technology development—prioritizing the health and safety of children as fundamental rather than optional.
Public awareness must evolve beyond superficial debates about content moderation to include an understanding of how platform design manipulates mental health. Parents, educators, and policymakers should demand transparency about how these features operate and push for stricter standards that prohibit malicious and addictive design elements. Then there is the responsibility of developers themselves—shouldering a duty of care that transcends profit margins.
<...>
Moving Toward an Ethical Tech Future
The challenge is how to steer the industry toward a more humane and responsible trajectory. It begins with holding companies accountable through rigorous litigation, regulation, and public pressure. But more importantly, it requires a paradigm shift in how we conceive of technological innovation—one centered on human dignity, mental health, and ethical responsibility.
If the industry continues down its current path, we risk normalized exploitation of vulnerable populations, with children bearing the brunt of these reckless practices. The law’s refusal to dismiss the New Hampshire lawsuit signals a crucial recognition: that technology must serve the well-being of society, not undermine it. Moving forward, stakeholders across sectors must collaborate to create platforms that are designed ethically, fostering genuine engagement and safeguarding the mental health of their youngest users. The moral imperative is clear—our digital future depends on it.