Tech Companies Called to Account

Part 6 in the series The Brain, the Screen and the School

We have been all the way through. Tech companies’ design . Sleep . Politics . The brain’s basic needs . Learning .

Now in the finale, I look outward. Because something is actually happening. And it is moving faster than you might think.

The verdicts that are changing the game

In March 2026, something historic happened. A jury in Los Angeles found Meta and YouTube liable for deliberately designing addictive features that had harmed young users. The plaintiff, known by the initials KGM, was awarded approximately six million dollars in damages.

The day before, a jury in New Mexico had established that Meta had violated the state’s consumer protection laws by failing to protect children from sexual predators on Instagram. Damages: 375 million dollars.

These are not small matters. Legal experts compare them to the tobacco industry’s losses in the 1990s. For the first time, tech companies are being held legally responsible for the design of their platforms themselves, not just for individual pieces of content.

In May 2026, Meta, YouTube, TikTok and Snap then settled with a school district in Kentucky to avoid trial. It was the first of 1,200 similar cases from American schools seeking compensation for what they call a mental health crisis among pupils, caused by platform design.

Think about that for a moment. Schools are suing tech companies because they need more resources to deal with pupils’ poor mental health. And the platforms are paying to avoid facing a jury.

That says something about where we are.

The EU raises the bar

On this side of the Atlantic, the EU is driving the same question, but through legislation rather than courts.

The Digital Services Act , which came into full force in 2024, compels the large platforms to risk-assess their design, be transparent about their algorithms, and protect minors in particular. Violations can result in fines of up to six per cent of global annual turnover. For Meta, that means billions in potential sanctions.

And now the next step is coming. The EU is preparing rules that would force platforms to verify age and refrain from directing addictive features at minors. Several EU countries are also pursuing national tracks in parallel: France, Spain, Greece and Denmark have all investigated or introduced forms of age limits.

It is worth noting: the regulation is no longer coming from individual researchers raising their voices. It is coming from governments.

Sweden takes a seat at the table

On 9 October 2025, the Swedish government established an inquiry into age limits for social media . The investigator is Lisa Englund Krafft, head of legal preparation at the Supreme Administrative Court.

The interim report is due on 12 June 2026 – just a few weeks away as I write this. The final report comes in November.

Social Affairs Minister Jakob Forssmed (KD) said when the inquiry was launched: “The grip that social media has taken on children’s time and reality must be broken. Harmful content and addictive algorithms must be pushed back.”

And it is no longer just KD and L driving the issue. In October 2025, the Social Democrats’ Magdalena Andersson announced that the party wants a strict age limit of 15 with ID verification for every account. The Left Party and the Centre Party have made similar statements. On this question, something unusual in Swedish politics is beginning to take shape: broad consensus across party lines.

It shows that the issue has moved from political conflict to broad agreement. When parties from right to left see the same problem and arrive at similar solutions, it is no longer ideology. It is reality.

For children, this is not ideology. It is life or death, sometimes literally. And young people have neither the voice nor the resources to protect themselves against the most sophisticated engineering teams in the world.

What this means locally

As a member of the Basic School Committee in Örebro , I think about this in concrete terms. What do we do when the legislation arrives?

First: we are already preparing. The mobile phone ban in compulsory schools from 1 July is part of that. School libraries are being rebuilt . Physical teaching materials are returning . It is not enough, but it is the right direction.

Second: Det Syns Inte , the programme for which Sissela Nutley is scientifically responsible, is now in 350 Swedish schools. It is a concrete tool that gives pupils knowledge about their own brains and habits. Not finger-wagging, but understanding. That is the kind of initiative I would be glad to see more schools in Örebro consider.

Third: we have a role with parents. School is one of the few places where all parents actually meet. Twenty minutes at a parents’ evening about sleep, phone routines and mental rest can do more for pupils’ wellbeing than many more expensive measures.

And fourth, most importantly: we must keep saying it as it is. This is not a culture war between technology enthusiasts and technology sceptics. It is a question of children having the right to a brain that is allowed to develop, a sleep that is allowed to come, and a childhood that is not optimised for advertising revenue.

What I take with me

What I take with me from Sissela Nutley’s lecture is her recurring words: rig the environment.

We adults should not compete with the algorithms for children’s attention. We should ensure that they grow up in environments where the right thing is also the easy thing. Where sleep comes naturally because the screen is somewhere else. Where learning is allowed to be slow in the right way. Where relationships are built in time that has not been made efficient.

Where we take children’s brains seriously.

That is no small task. But it is ours.

Thank you for following the series all the way through. It began in a lecture hall in Helsingborg and has journeyed through school corridors, teenagers’ bedrooms, the twists of politics and courtrooms in the United States. What I hope you take with you is not exact research figures, but a sense of where we stand. And an idea that this can be changed. With knowledge. With politics. And above all with adults who dare to say: we are not going to do it this way any more.

Back to the full series .