The Insight • April 3rd, 2026

The Insight: AI, Algorithms, and Addiction

Insight,AI,Artificial Intelligence,Social Media,Technology,Health

This is your free monthly edition of The Insight. Become a Sustaining Member for as little as $4.99/month to access The Insight every Friday.

The 21st century’s technology boom has had unforeseen side effects on humanity. AI and internet algorithms, especially on social media, are changing the ways people behave and communicate. But could pushback against Big Tech’s rising influence be a powerful new area of common ground?

In this week’s Insight, our balanced news team explored a wide range of opinions and data on AI, algorithms, addiction, and the actions you can take to protect yourself.

Explore perspectives on:

What long-term implications does the Meta/YouTube ruling have?

Last week, a jury in Los Angeles found Meta (parent company of Instagram and Facebook) and YouTube liable in a trial that accused the social media platforms of being intentionally designed to get users addicted. The companies were told to pay the plaintiff $3 million in damages, with Meta paying 70% of the amount, and Google the remaining 30%. There will also be a second trial to determine punitive fines these companies will pay.

These companies will hardly notice the loss of a few million dollars. But what other implications does the decision have?

“By demonstrating that the seductive, time-sucking design features of Meta and YouTube’s products like an infinitely scrollable feed and autoplaying videos were the definitive cause of harm, the plaintiffs have exposed a wide swath of software to litigation,” said The Guardian (Left).

A writer for USA TODAY (Lean Left) was similarly enthused about the possibility of repercussions for Big Tech, saying the “damning verdicts for Meta and other platforms serve as a warning for lawsuits that could lie ahead and for parents worried about the dangers that lurk in the digital frontier.”

This sentiment was shared across the political spectrum. Some also pushed for heavier crackdowns.

“Critics of social-media platforms are rejoicing over two rulings last week that aim to hold Meta and Google accountable for harm inflicted on kids,” wrote the New York Post Editorial Board (Right), “but what about Tik Tok, likely the worst offender in this space?”

“Whatever damage other social-media networks have done,” the board continues, “TikTok’s ties to Beijing should make its harm impossible to ignore.”

Attention Spans

“Excessive digital media use is scientifically proven to shrink our attention spans,” according to an ongoing Worldmetrics analysis. The report, last verified in 2026, cites multiple supportive studies.

Stanford University (2023): “individuals who spend over 4 hours daily on social media show 22% reduced activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, linked to attention regulation.”
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2022): “participants exposed to more than 3 hours of digital media daily have a 15% shorter attention span compared to those with less than 1 hour.”
American Psychological Association (APA) (2021): “chronic use of smartphones desensitizes dopamine receptors, leading to a 30% higher need for immediate rewards, which correlates with reduced ability to sustain focus on non-instant gratification tasks.”

It’s worth noting that attention spans were dropping significantly before AI emerged.

Dopamine Reception and Mental Health

As cited in the APA study above, “chronic use of smartphones desensitizes dopamine receptors.” Dopamine deficiencies are proven to cause mental health disorders such as depression and anxiety, and they can even contribute to obesity, Parkinson’s disease, substance use disorders, and sleep disorders.

A Harvard University analysis published in 2017 suggested, “Many of the pressures teenagers feel from social media are actually consistent with developmentally normal concerns around social standing and self-expression.” However, the article also cited an Association for Psychological Science study that found, “48 percent of teens who spend five hours per day on an electronic device have at least one suicide risk factor, compared to 33 percent of teens who spend two hours a day on an electronic device.”

Socialization

Though much of the data surrounding digital media use and mental health is correlational, it is also widely accepted as having scientific relevance.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) cited data from 2003-2020 that exhibited the following trends:
- Increased social isolation
- Decreased family engagement
- Decreased companionship
- Decreased social engagement with friends
- Decreased social engagement with others
A 2023 study published in the National Library of Medicine (NLM) concluded, “Active social media use was significantly and negatively related to social anxiety, whereas passive social networking site use was significantly and positively related to social anxiety. Reducing the use of passive social media among college students and adopting communication capacity-oriented interventions may yield benefits for improving students’ psychological wellbeing; educators should pay sufficient attention to them.”

How does “tech addiction” compare to other substance addictions?

Caffeine and alcohol, two very socially acceptable substances, are also highly addictive and can come with negative cognitive side effects.

Alcohol’s are well-documented. But you might not know that caffeine has been found to block adenosine receptors, which “indirectly affects the release of neurotransmitters such as norepinephrine, dopamine, acetylcholine, serotonin, glutamate, and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA),” according to a study published in the NLM. “An influx in these neurotransmitters alters mood, memory, alertness, and cognitive function.”

Social media apps such as TikTok, which encourage constant scrolling, can “weaken inhibitory control in the prefrontal cortex, which results in more Beta waves (12-30 Hz) and makes it harder to stop using the interface,” according to another NLM-published study. It “revealed that those who spent more than two hours a day scrolling had a 35% drop in prefrontal impulse control, as shown by a decrease in Beta wave variability.”

In short, all these substances can inhibit cognitive processing while encouraging further usage.

The latter study also found that “TikTok’s algorithm causes dopamine to spike when funny videos are followed by serious political videos. There was more Gamma wave (30-100 Hz) activity during high-reward moments, and Gamma power went up by 62% compared to when participants viewed neutral content.”

Translation: your brain has a hard time resisting rage-bait, and tech companies take full advantage of that.

How Dangerous is the Rise of AI to Humans?

VERY DANGEROUS, as AI does not only impact mental health and workforce replacement, but could become an existential threat to humanity.

Artificial intelligence usage has been shown to slow human brain function, and is disrupting the human capacity to think critically.
AI automation will soon replace many manual labor and intellectual jobs, leaving millions if not billions of people jobless.
Corporations like Palantir are developing advanced AI facial recognition technology alongside autonomous drones and robots that have already been mobilized in war zones around the world and could threaten humanity if used maliciously.

SOMEWHAT DANGEROUS, depending on use cases, AI can affect cognitive abilities, can replace jobs, and can be used for military operations.

AI use in academia and writing only affects brain matter if used to cheat, not using it to assist your thinking.
AI will impact some jobs, but more jobs will be created to maintain AI software, to maintain robots, and through innovation.
AI use in military operations poses a deadlier threat on the battlefield, but may also save human lives through intelligence capabilities or autonomous warfare.

NOT DANGEROUS, as AI is only making humans more efficient and creative, and will save human lives in wars and beyond.

Artificial intelligence is not dangerous and is a net benefit to society. AI compliments human thinking by acting as an assistant that can help prevent writer’s block, brainstorm creative ideas, and conserve brain energy for more important tasks.
AI will replace menial labor jobs and open up more creative industries for humans. Jobs may no longer be necessary, inequality may decrease, and humans may live without a need for currency.
Physical warfare will become obsolete as drones and robots become the norm, and conflicts will be fought and resolved digitally, saving countless human lives.

Is combatting a “tech takeover” the next big bipartisan issue?

On January 12, Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis “insisted it’s the state’s job to make sure ‘Floridians are not going to end up roadkill with this AI revolution that’s going on,’” according to Politico (Lean Left bias). Politico also quoted Utah’s Republican Gov. Spencer Cox, who said, “You do not hate these companies enough,” referring to large social media companies with increasing AI products.

Similarly, Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order giving the state four months to develop AI policies around public safety, defying Trump’s demands for deregulation.

The overlap isn’t limited to politicians:

The New York Times (Lean Left) published articles about how AI-generated videos are "distorting" American children’s YouTube feeds and why Americans should “tread lightly” before giving their health records to AI chatbots, echoing fears of giving tech companies too much control and insight into individuals’ lives.
Fox News (Right) reported that a new coalition is warning Americans that child safety risks from tech, social media, and AI companies are outpacing the safeguards and regulations meant to protect them.

The Trump administration’s AI regulation framework notes that “Respecting Intellectual Property Rights and Supporting Creators” and “Protecting Children and Empowering Parents” are key tenets to addressing Americans’ uncertainty about AI technology. However, it also emphasizes the importance of preventing AI censorship, removing regulations and “unnecessary barriers to innovation,” and developing an “AI-ready workforce.”

National Review Opinion (Right) noted that Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) criticized the AI regulation freeze provision within the Big, Beautiful Bill last summer, saying, “There is no way I’m going to sit back and say to the working people of my state and this country, we’re just going to let AI come for you.”

Interestingly, most people agree that AI threatens some jobs – they just doubt their own job will be impacted.

What are the implications of AI establishing itself as an informational authority?

It’s easy to look at AI and fear what information it’s giving out–from hallucinations and misinformation to perceived biased responses, all wrapped in a confidence that’s hard to refute. The line between “truth” and what AI decides is “truth” can be hard to see. But this didn’t start with AI.

The moment Google started deciding which websites were placed at the top of its search results, or the moment social media algorithms decided which posts showed up on our feed, was the moment we handed over informational authority to machines. AI didn’t create this problem, but where we were given options before, now we’re being given answers.

With generative AI search, the information we receive is a combination of data written by humans–including our blind spots, values, disagreements and biases–and web content specifically tailored to show up in AI search results through generative engine optimization (GEO).

SemRush

Not only does this influence our perception of certain topics and limit the information we’re given, but the Washington Post (Lean Left) noted this change shifts the dynamic for both creators and users who now receive limited overviews of information from quickly-scraped websites.

This influence from millions of humans using and training AI (and businesses, publishers and organizations competing for citation) means that the confident, neutral answers you’re receiving are not exactly that.

Some outlets like the Washington Examiner (Lean Right), Fox Business (Lean Right) and Brookings (Center) have noted the impact this has on politics, claiming that AI tools like ChatGPT now exhibit a left-leaning political bias, whether intentionally or not.

When it comes to information AI doesn’t know, it predicts the most statistically likely next word based on patterns learned from training data. This is what causes “hallucinations.” In 2026, even the best AI models hallucinate at least 0.8% of the time, while the average hallucination rate for all AI models is 9.2%, according to AllAbout AI.

The stakes rise when you think about how much people use AI as an all around resource.

Some users turned to AI chatbots not just for information, but for guidance on their own reality.
Some research suggests reliance on AI tools could contribute to “cognitive atrophy” over time as critical thinking skills and cross-checking information provided by AI decline.
AI companies have been sued over chatbots allegedly encouraging people to commit crimes or harm themselves.

On the other hand, tech outlets like Gartner and IBM argued this widespread adoption of generative AI could lead to the democratization of AI technology by providing access to information and skills across both individual and business uses.

Specifically, IBM argued the use of AI by more people can create better AI solutions, “serve a broader array of stakeholders and users” and “prevent AI bias.”

As AI continues to become an informational authority, the responsibility of discernment now shifts to users, and becomes more essential. While AI can be a useful tool for research and creative ideation, it’s also important to continue exercising our cognitive muscles.

Remind yourself where these answers come from. If a response to a nuanced question seems too black-and-white, challenge it. The gap between what’s “likely” and what’s “true” could continue to grow as AI usage continues, so it’s important to be a conscious participant.

Is embracing AI inevitable?

Ask any tech or business executive, and the answer is yes, embracing generative AI is a necessity going forward. A 2025 report from McKinsey & Company said about 92% of companies plan to increase their investments in AI tools over the next three years.

By 2029, 20 million US workers are expected to retrain in new careers or in AI use, according to National University. It reported 30% of current US jobs could be automated by 2030 and 60% will see significant task-level changes with AI integration. Fourteen percent of global employees would also be forced to switch careers because of AI by 2030.

Within the workplace and beyond, AI is already being used for job searches, resume reviews by companies, medical advice, writing school papers, winning legal cases, creating art and music, drafting religious sermons and generating news summaries, among other things. For the majority of us, opting out of AI is almost impossible.

However, while AI adoption has been growing over the last few years, so has pushback against it. A YouGov (Center) poll found 41% of Americans expressed distrust toward AI in 2025 and another 77% were concerned AI could pose a threat to humanity. When asked how much they trust AI across specific industries, Americans didn’t express net positive trust in a single sector. So where does that leave us?

There’s a growing movement against AI among creatives, labor unions, media publishers, authors and environmentalists. Some companies have leaned into this desire for authentic creation by prioritizing “human made” content and pledging to not use AI in their marketing or writing.

Whether AI is inevitable in our lives will probably be determined by negotiation over time. We’ll have to decide between efficiency and authenticity and between what technology makes possible and what people actually want. AI isn’t going away, but neither is the human instinct to protect self-expression and authenticity.

How can people protect themselves?

Make no mistake, there are productive and healthy ways to use AI. For “creators,” that requires transparency. For users, that requires inoculation.

Major news sources including the New York Times, Fox News, AP, and others, are now using AI to help create content, with varying levels of transparency.

While the waters remain muddy, you must take matters into your own hands.