California AG says very interested in Snap (SNAP) and Youtube (GOOGL), following META (META) settlement, via CNBC TV

State attorney general action against platform operators has historically followed a sequencing pattern: one defendant settles, and the same coalition or parallel enforcers then signal interest in the remaining names in the peer set, since the legal theory and much of the discovery work transfers across cases. Remarks of this kind, delivered on television rather than through a filed complaint, sit at the soft end of the enforcement spectrum; they have tended to function as leverage in settlement talks rather than as the opening of litigation, and the settled case establishes the template the others are measured against. The transmission channel for the named names is typically headline-driven and idiosyncratic rather than sector-wide: the stock in the crosshairs underperforms its interactive media peers on the day, while prior settlements in this space have been absorbed as one-off items without durable multiple damage unless the remedy touches the core product. The relevant follow-ons are whether the interest converts into a formal investigation or filing, whether other states join, and the size and conduct terms of the prior settlement, which set the anchor for what resolution costs. California's AG has prior form in consumer protection and privacy enforcement against large technology platforms, so the signal carries more weight than a first-time entrant to this docket would.