Tech companies should lose immunity for addictive design.

Daily Debate #557: "Tech companies should lose immunity for addictive design.". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Child neglect

Look, you're actually arguing FOR immunity here—companies design addictive products that trap kids instead of parents raising them. That's not neglect, that's predatory business. Why should Meta profit while parents lose their kids to algorithms?

You're flipping causation backward. Parents aren't losing kids to algorithms because Meta is too powerful—they're losing them because they won't set boundaries. A locked phone takes five seconds to fix. Removing immunity doesn't change that. It just lets lawyers profit instead of parents doing their actual job.

Wrong direction entirely. You're asking parents to fight trillion-dollar companies alone—that's not parenting, that's an unfair fight. These platforms employ neuroscientists to hijack dopamine systems. A "locked phone" doesn't stop the push notifications, the streaks, the algorithmic feeds engineered to addict. Accountability isn't about lawyers, it's about stopping predatory design at the source instead of blaming parents for losing a rigged game.

You're describing a rigged game where parents have zero agency. That's not reality—it's learned helplessness. Yes, Meta employs neuroscientists. So do candy companies. We don't ban sugar because kids want it; we expect parents to say no. The "unfair fight" excuse assumes parents are powerless, but they control the device, the WiFi, the money. Removing immunity won't change that dynamic. It just shifts blame from parenting to litigation. A child without access loses the addiction instantly. That's not rigged—that's a choice parents refuse to make.

You're comparing apples to heroin. Candy doesn't use AI to predict exactly when your kid's most vulnerable and hit them with a notification. Parents aren't refusing—they're competing against engineers whose sole job is making apps impossible to quit. Immunity lets that happen consequence-free. Yes, parents have tools, but removing immunity forces companies to stop designing *for* addiction instead of just asking families to white-knuckle their way through it. Why should tech get a free pass other industries lost decades ago?