At the end of August, Meta agreed to improve safety for its young users and pay a staggering $17.1 billion settlement following a landmark federal trial over children’s online safety, the largest since Big Tobacco paid $200 billion in the ‘90s. Four states, representing 47 states across the country, alleged that the social media giant collected data on kids under 13 and intentionally designed its platform to be addictive for young users.
It’s a major development in the battle for kids’ online safety against Big Tech, but surely far from the last.
“We’re at a point where companies like Meta have had 20 years to make their platforms safe,” said Katie Paul, director of the Tech Transparency Project. “They have proven time and again that regardless of what they state in their policies, that is not playing out in reality.”
As kids head back to school in Michigan, parents, teachers, and state legislators are keenly aware of the risks associated with these platforms. Legislators, for their part, have enacted a statewide law this year that requires students to put their cell phones away during instructional time.
“These extreme measures are only being taken by policymakers because the companies have not taken the measures themselves and done anything meaningful in terms of actually protecting children,” Paul said.
Screen time risks for kids
Screen time is a hot-button issue these days. A 2026 McGraw Hill Global Education Insights Report showed excessive screen time was the biggest obstacle to student success, according to 1,300 educators surveyed. Of those, 86 percent of K-12 teachers said they’re concerned about students’ mental health, their ability to focus, and their ability to regulate emotions.
And while many educators report being cautiously optimistic about some tech tools, such as artificial intelligence (AI), 42 percent view social media as a net negative, underscoring growing concerns about the impact of platforms like Meta, TikTok, and YouTube on students’ concentration and learning.
As part of the Meta settlement, the tech giant promised to restrict users under the age of 18 to two hours of app time each day, implement age verification measures, alert users to their time spent on the app, remove ‘like’ counts, prevent the use of filters, and allow users to shut off the video autoplay feature. How and whether they follow through with those promises—and others included in the settlement—remain to be seen.
“The bigger question right now is this influence of algorithms in terms of what’s being seen and for how long, and what kind of rabbit holes do people end up going down?” said Dr. Elyse Thuin, an Assistant Research Professor at the University of Michigan. Thuin works in the university’s Youth Policy Lab, where she studies youth mental health.
She noted that certain videos the algorithm feeds to young users make it hard to put the phone down.
“Media that incites high emotional response, particularly like fear, anger—that is the most compelling to continue to engage with,” she said, adding that screen time is not the best measure of how harmful these platforms can be.
“It doesn’t tell us what kids are seeing, what people are seeing, or what they’re doing and what they’re experiencing,” she added.
Meta fights back
Just because Meta has agreed to a settlement doesn’t mean the company is admitting guilt.
“The company has been insisting for years now that they’re doing so much to protect kids, and yet these court cases show that there certainly was a lot more that they could do, and it took taking them to court to the tune of billions of dollars for them to actually commit to that,” Paul said.
Young users make up a large portion of Meta’s base. Unlike tech giants like Google and TikTok, which have multiple revenue streams, Meta has just one.
“Meta only has its social media advertising revenue. That’s it. So if you cut off kids or any portion of teens—who are the biggest money drivers for the company and the lifelong users they’re trying to hook—you’re cutting off a big chunk of potential revenue that could meaningfully hurt their business,” Paul said.
That’s why Meta has fought tooth and nail against major bans in countries such as New Zealand and Australia, where users under 16 are prohibited from using social media of all kinds. In the European Union, lawmakers are moving toward a ban for users under 13 across 27 countries.
“Even when states have tried to step up, we see aggressive lobbying by tech companies, Meta in particular, and one of its trade association groups, Net Choice, to push back against any meaningful legislation,” Paul said, adding that Meta’s lobbying efforts have been even more aggressive than those of Big Tobacco and Big Oil.
The company has even employed its own users to challenge potential bans.
The Tech Transparency Project reported on Meta’s efforts to use social media influencers to fight the ban this year, hosting ‘momfluencers’ at high-end events where they were given talking points for sponsored posts. The influencers were told to say the bans were ineffective and that Meta actually offers safer guardrails for young users.
The Tech Transparency Project’s May 2026 investigation found that the company built a network of hundreds of creators. That includes paid doctors and psychologists, not just “momfluencers.” Meta recruited them through “Screen Smart” events, run with help from influencer marketing agencies.
Michigan lawmakers consider further action
Meta isn’t the only platform distracting students or compromising their online safety, which is why lawmakers in Michigan are considering a more holistic approach: banning wireless communication devices in schools during instructional time.
Governor Gretchen Whitmer signed a law in February aimed at limiting phone distractions during school hours. Senate Bill 495 and House Bill 4141 require schools to adopt policies that limit phone use during class, except in emergencies or for educational purposes.
This is the first school year in which those policies will be in effect; however, a study conducted by the Youth Policy Lab earlier this year found that most Michigan districts already had some form of policy in place. Those policies varied in terms of how and when schools restricted phone use.
In April, the Youth Policy Lab held a national conference on phones in schools.
While Americans increasingly support similar bans for middle- and high-school-aged kids, according to a 2025 Pew Research Study, some Michigan parents have already voiced skepticism about the new policies.
Thuin said school measures are helpful, but not a full solution.
“There are a lot of hours outside of school that still are not being monitored, and that creates a lot of disparities,” she said.
Thuin described state bans and laws as a “patchwork” solution used in the absence of federal legislation protecting youth.
“If it were more of a federal regulation, everyone would, in theory, equally benefit from it,” she said. “So you wouldn’t have pockets of populations that are not having protection, but also it’s much more incentive for the companies.”
