Meta and YouTube found liable in landmark social media addiction trial
Meta and YouTube found liable in landmark social media addiction trial
A Los Angeles jury has ruled in favor of a young woman who sued Meta and YouTube over her childhood social media dependency. The verdict, which holds both companies accountable for fostering addictive behaviors, could set a precedent for numerous ongoing cases in U.S. courts. Kaley, the plaintiff, was awarded $6m in damages, with the jury determining that Meta and Google “acted with malice, oppression, or fraud” in their platform operations.
The damages split saw Meta covering 70% of the award, while Google contributed the remaining 30%. This decision follows a five-week trial where parents of affected children gathered outside the courthouse, cheering as the verdict was announced. Amy Neville, one such parent, was seen celebrating with supporters, highlighting the widespread concern among families.
“Teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app,” said Meta’s spokesperson, emphasizing the company’s defense against the verdict. “We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously, as every case is unique.”
“This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site,” added a Google representative. Both companies have expressed intent to appeal the decision.
The LA ruling coincided with a similar verdict in New Mexico, where a jury found Meta liable for exposing children to explicit content and predators. Mike Proulx, a research director at Forrester, noted the verdicts signal a “breaking point” between social media firms and the public. Countries like Australia have already introduced measures to restrict children’s screen time, and the UK is testing a ban for users under 16.
During the trial, Mark Zuckerberg defended Meta’s policies, citing the company’s rule against users under 13. However, internal documents showed Meta was aware of younger users accessing its platforms. “I always wished for faster progress to identify users under 13,” Zuckerberg stated, claiming the company had reached the “right place over time.”
Kaley’s legal team argued that Instagram and YouTube were engineered as “addiction machines,” prioritizing user engagement over well-being. She began using Instagram at age nine and YouTube at six, claiming no age-based restrictions were enforced. “I stopped engaging with family because I was spending all my time on social media,” Kaley testified.
The plaintiff described how her mental health deteriorated by age 10, with anxiety and depression diagnosed years later. She also detailed her obsession with physical appearance, using Instagram filters to alter her features. This led to a diagnosis of body dysmorphia, a condition where individuals fixate on perceived flaws in their appearance. Kaley’s lawyers linked this to features like infinite scroll, designed to keep users engaged indefinitely.
Although Snap and TikTok were initially named as defendants, they reached settlements with Kaley before the trial. The case underscores growing scrutiny of tech companies’ role in shaping childhood habits and mental health outcomes.
