From wikipedia:

Narco-state, also called narco-capitalism or narco-economy,[a] is a political and economic term applied to countries where all legitimate institutions become penetrated by the power and wealth of the illegal drug trade. The overall description would consist of illegal organisations that either produce, ship or sell drugs and hold a grip on the legitimate institutions through force, bribery or blackmail.[4] This situation can arise in different forms. For instance, Colombia, where drug lord Pablo Escobar ran the Medellín Cartel (named after his birthplace) during most of the 1970s and 1980s, producing and trafficking cocaine to the United States of America. Escobar managed to take over control of most of the police forces in Medellín and surrounding areas through bribery and coercion, allowing him to expand his drug trafficking business.[5]

So let’s not discuss if social media is addicting, let’s talk about how those big profitable tech companies have captured the american state and are shaping its policies, preventing its institutions from protecting their citizen from harm and pushing for laxer rules worldwide. We are seeing this american attack on the EU exactly because the EU is currently trying to restrict the power of big tech.

You don’t see any behavioural similarities between drug use and social media usage?

Your critique isn’t addressing that, you state instead that media is social. Well yeah. Drug consumption is in many cases too. But that doesn’t define it.

You also make it seem as if there was just a single dangerous outlier in the game that can’t be used as a reference.

How about the studies of the algorithms of Meta, youtube, reddit, that revealed how they work on the dopamine centres of their users and manipulate them?