Liking, commenting, and subscribing legal education: Embedding Social Media as a Contextual Learning Tool in Legal Education.
This paper explores how embedding social media as a contextual learning tool in the Law and Technology module at QUB can transform a potential distraction into an effective educational resource, using a case study of 120 students' reflection journals to analyze benefits, risks, and student feedback.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
In the modern world, the devices we carry in our pockets are no longer just tools for communication; they are vast, living ecosystems where law, technology, and human behavior collide every second. For decades, educators have viewed the constant pull of social media as a distraction, a force that fragments attention and pulls students away from serious study. However, a growing body of thought suggests that these platforms are not merely obstacles to learning but are themselves the very subject matter of modern legal education. The question is no longer whether to ban these digital spaces from the classroom, but how to turn the act of scrolling, liking, and commenting into a laboratory for understanding complex rules. When a student clicks "agree" on a terms-of-service agreement without reading it, or when an algorithm decides what news to show them, they are participating in a legal process that is often invisible to them. Understanding how these digital mechanisms work is now as essential for a future lawyer as understanding a contract or a statute.
At Queen's University Belfast, a researcher named Liam Sunner decided to test a bold idea: what if students stopped treating social media as a distraction and started using it as a primary textbook? In the 2025–2026 academic year, Sunner introduced a unique assignment into a final-year module called "Law and Technology." Instead of asking 118 students to write a traditional essay based on reading lists, he asked them to create a brand-new social media account on a platform of their choice. For a few weeks, these students were required to engage with the platform in any way they felt comfortable—liking posts, commenting, subscribing, or simply observing the feed. They were not forced to pay for anything or post content they found uncomfortable. The goal was to use this new account as a prism, a focused lens through which to view the legal concepts they were studying in class, such as data privacy, censorship, and the power of algorithms.
The results of this experiment, detailed in Sunner's research, suggest that the approach was highly effective. By stepping into the role of a new user, the students moved from passive listeners to active investigators. They began to notice things they had previously ignored. One student, for instance, realized that the "consent" they gave to a platform was often just a performative click, a habit formed by the design of the app rather than a genuine understanding of what they were agreeing to. Another student observed how the platform's algorithm seemed to push certain types of content, effectively shaping their reality without them realizing it. The assignment forced them to confront the "privacy paradox," a concept where people claim to care about their privacy but act in ways that sacrifice it for convenience. By creating a fresh account, the students saw the raw, uncurated experience of a new user, stripped of their personal history, which revealed how platforms treat everyone as a source of data to be harvested.
The feedback from the students was strikingly consistent. They reported a shift in their daily habits, noting that they now read privacy policies more carefully and questioned the motives behind the content they saw. Many described a newfound awareness of how their digital actions were being tracked and used to influence their behavior. One student noted that they had become more critical of the risks involved, taking time to review terms before accepting them. Another realized that the illusion of privacy on these platforms was just that—an illusion. The assignment did not just teach them about the law; it allowed them to feel the weight of it. They saw firsthand how the rules of the digital world often favor the platform over the user, and how the law struggles to keep pace with the speed of technological change.
This method of learning offered benefits that traditional lectures could not easily provide. Because the task was low-stakes and familiar, it lowered the barriers to participation. Students who might have been shy in a large seminar felt more comfortable sharing their observations in a reflection journal. The assignment also proved to be a robust defense against the use of artificial intelligence to generate fake work. Because the task required personal, real-time engagement with a live platform, the resulting reflections were deeply individual and impossible to fabricate with a simple prompt. The students' writing was filled with specific details about their own experiences, the specific platforms they chose, and the unique ways those platforms treated them.
However, the study also highlighted the complexities of this approach. The researchers noted that while the method worked well for a module focused on technology, it might be harder to apply to more traditional subjects like contract law or equity, where the connection to social media is less direct. There were also risks to consider. The open nature of social media meant that students could be exposed to harmful or inappropriate content, and the researchers had to be careful not to put students in a position where they felt unsafe. Furthermore, some students chose to use platforms that were known for controversy, and while they engaged with the material, they did not always fully connect the platform's specific issues to the broader legal discussions in the same way others did.
Despite these challenges, the experiment was deemed a success. The students did not just learn about the law; they learned how to navigate the digital world with a critical eye. They left the module with a deeper understanding of how technology shapes their autonomy and how the law attempts, often imperfectly, to protect them. The study suggests that the future of legal education may lie in these hybrid spaces, where the classroom extends into the digital realm, and where the act of scrolling becomes an act of learning. By embedding social media as a contextual tool, educators can transform a potential distraction into a powerful resource, preparing students not just to know the law, but to understand the world in which that law operates.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.