header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
04 July 2025 / Harry Lambert
Issue: 8123 / Categories: Features , Profession , Liability , Social Media , Technology , Personal injury , Consumer
printer mail-detail

Is social media a defective product? Pt 2

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
224731
In the second part of this series, Harry Lambert tackles some key questions: is social media a ‘product’ at all, and how might claims be brought against its platforms?
  • Legal debate intensifies over whether platforms qualify as ‘products’ under the Consumer Protection Act 1987—if so, they could face liability for harm caused by their design and algorithms.
  • While the Online Safety Act 2023 imposes duties to tackle illegal and age-inappropriate content, its vague standards and limited scope mean it is both a benchmark and a battleground for future claims.

This series evaluates the potential liability of social media companies for the harms caused by their algorithms and interface designs, conceptualising these platforms as products causing personal injury.

In Pt 1, we considered whether it was possible to sue social media companies at all, or whether they are protected by statutory or contractual immunity (‘Is social media a defective product? Pt 1’, NLJ, 18 & 25 April 2025, pp19-21).

Having

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll