header-logo header-logo

21 November 2025
Issue: 8140 / Categories: Legal News , Technology , Social Media , Liability , Mental health
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Making Big Tech pay for digital addiction

236032
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ

Platforms, he says, deliberately exploit users’ 'limbic hijacks' to engineer addiction and profit from resulting harms—ranging from depression and body dysmorphia to exploitation.

Drawing analogies with tobacco and gambling, Lambert contends that tortious liability should extend to algorithms designed to manipulate emotion and attention. In detailed examples—including 'Snapchat rape' and online body-image disorders—he explores how legal principles such as the 'creation of danger' doctrine could hold companies accountable.

Citing internal Meta research and whistleblower evidence, Lambert concludes that only litigation can compel Big Tech to redesign its systems: lawyers must make harming users more expensive than changing the algorithm.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll