Fourteen U.S. states recently filed a lawsuit against TikTok and parent company ByteDance, claiming the video streaming platform has negative effects on children’s mental health and that TikTok created an "intentionally addictive app”.
Ignoring for a moment that social media apps are, by definition, addictive by design, it’s worth pointing out that politics plays a considerable role in the lawsuits, with conservative American politicians scrambling to prove they care about their nation’s youth while not actively fighting gun control measures.
But that doesn’t make the leaked documents any less interesting. With the cases still in court, many confidential documents have been redacted. However, a slip-up in Kentucky revealed a trove of TikTok internal memos.
According to an article published by American public broadcasting organisation NPR, it only takes around 35 minutes to become "addicted" to TikTok — an analysis of data revealed an "addiction number" of 260: in that it takes an average user 260 videos to start displaying addictive behaviour. The short duration of TikTok videos means that this is likely to happen in a little over half an hour of viewing.
While the leaked documents have now been re-sealed (by a presumably furious Kentucky Attorney-General), the proverbial horse has bolted.
Also from NPR:
'TikTok’s own research states that “compulsive usage correlates with a slew of negative mental health effects like loss of analytical skills, memory formation, contextual thinking, conversational depth, empathy and increased anxiety,” according to the suit.'
But what does this mean for Australia?
The Federal Government has had a stab at addressing the issue, with the well-meaning but slightly cartoonish The Hidden Trends of Disrespect campaign, addressing the concerning influence of infamous online personalities, from Andrew Tate to "thinspo" influencer Liv Schmidt.
From a regulatory perspective, the Federal Government’s eSafety Commissioner was shown to be toothless in a battle with Elon Musk over misinformation and hate speech.
In his analysis of the issue, media and communications expert Professor Terry Flew makes the point:
'The company (Twitter/X) is clearly prepared to contest fines against it in the courts rather than choose the path of compliance assumed under the co-regulatory, safety-by-design-model… [There] has often been the sense that the global tech giants simply disregard requests to change and use their market power to steamroll governments.'
One has to ask the question: is it really a sensible idea for the Australian Government (or any government) to get into a protracted legal battle with the richest man in the world — or, indeed, the most powerful government in the region?
Research from the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) revealed that in 2023 a staggering 46 per cent of 18-24s nominated social media as their main source of news — up from 28 per cent in 2022.
Australians are consuming more of their media via digital channels, which means that filters formerly applied to news (and even truth) no longer apply.
Banning TikTok, as some less tech-savvy commentators suggest, would be almost entirely ineffectual for the intended target audience, with (Virtual Private Network) VPN technology allowing users to easily skirt geo-blocking.
When asked for comment by the ABC, a TikTok spokesperson pointed out that the platform has age limits and parental controls, handily shifting the burden of responsibility to parents and guardians.
As a parent of two teens… good luck with that.
John Turnbull is a cultural consultant with over a dozen years of experience connecting with and understanding diverse Australian communities.
Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA.