Jury in Los Angeles finds Meta and YouTube liable in landmark social media addiction trial
A California jury found that Meta and YouTube must pay millions in damages to a 20-year-old woman, finding that the social media giant and video streamer was designed to attract young users without concern for their well-being.
The ruling, handed down Wednesday in the first trial of its kind, could affect the outcome of thousands of similar cases accusing social media companies of intentionally harming children.
The plaintiff, identified only by her initials KGM, testified that she became addicted to social media as a child and that the addiction made her mental health struggles worse. After more than 40 hours of deliberations, a majority of jurors agreed and awarded him US$3 million in damages.
Jurors later recommended an additional US$3 million in punitive damages after finding that the companies acted with malicious intent, harassment or fraud in harming children through their platforms. The judge will have the final decision on how much compensation to pay.
this is Second decision against Meta A jury in New Mexico this week determined that the company violated state law by harming the mental health and safety of children.
Meta, the parent of Instagram and Facebook, and Google-owned YouTube issued statements disagreeing with the decision and vowing to explore their legal options, including an appeal.
Google spokesman Jose Castaneda said in the company’s statement that the case “misunderstands YouTube, which is not a social media site but a responsibly built streaming platform.”
A spokesperson for Meta said that teen mental health “is extremely complex and cannot be tied to any one app.”
Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg on the stand
Jurors heard arguments, testimony and evidence from lawyers for nearly a month, and they also heard from the plaintiff herself — identified in the documents as KGM, or Kelly, as her lawyers called her during the trial — as well as from Meta leaders Mark Zuckerberg and Adam Mosseri. YouTube CEO Neil Mohan was not called to testify.
A jury has found that Meta and YouTube were negligent in the design and operation of their platforms in a lawsuit aimed at holding them liable for harm caused to children who use their services.
Kelly, who says she started using YouTube at age six and Instagram at age nine, told the jury she was on social media “all day long” as a child.
The lawyers representing Kelly, led by Mark Lanier, were tasked with proving that the negligence of the respective defendants was a major factor in Kelly’s harm.
He pointed to specific design features that he said were designed to “hook” younger users, such as the “infinite” nature of the feed that allows for an endless supply of content, autoplay features, and even notifications.
Emma Duerden, an associate professor at Western University and Canada Research Chair in Neuroscience and Learning Disorders, explains how social media actually taps directly into the developing brains of teens.
Jurors were told not to take into account the content of posts and videos Kelly had seen on the platforms. This is because Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act protects tech companies from legal responsibility for the content posted on their sites.
Meta consistently argued that Kelly has struggled with her mental health in addition to her social media use, often pointing to her turbulent home life.
The company also said in a statement after closing arguments that “none of her therapists identified social media as a cause for her mental health issues”. But the plaintiffs did not have to prove that social media caused Kelly’s struggles – only that it was a “substantial factor” in causing her harm.
YouTube focused less on Kelly’s medical records and mental health history and more on her use of YouTube and the nature of the platform. It was argued that YouTube is not a form of social media, but rather a video platform similar to television, and points to a decline in YouTube usage as they grow older.
According to its data, since the beginning she spent an average of about one minute per day watching YouTube shorts. YouTube Shorts, which launched in 2020, is the platform’s section of short-form, vertical videos that features an “infinite scroll” that plaintiffs argue was addictive.
Lawyers representing both platforms also consistently pointed to the security features and guardrails they have in place to monitor and optimize people’s use of them.
‘Historic’ case is a potential troublemaker
This case, along with several others, has been randomly selected as a bellwether trial, meaning its outcome could affect how thousands of similar lawsuits filed against social media companies play out.
Laura Marquez-Garrett, an attorney with the Seattle-based Social Media Victims Law Center and Kelly’s lawyer, said during the deliberations that the lawsuit was “a means, not an outcome.”
Marquez-Garrett stressed the seriousness of bringing internal documents from Meta and Google into the public record, saying, “This case is historic no matter what happens because it was the first.”
The Social Media Victims Law Center and parents who learn of their children’s death or loss on social media will continue to fight, Marquez-Garrett said, adding that she wore several rubber wristbands in honor of the victims who have not taken off since the trial began.
Big technology companies in the US have faced increasing criticism over the past decade over the safety of children and teens. This debate has now focused on the courts and state governments. The US Congress has refused to pass comprehensive legislation regulating social media.
Last year, at least 20 states enacted laws on social media use and children, according to the nonpartisan National Conference of State Legislatures. Tracks state laws.
The legislation includes bills that regulate cellphone use in schools and require users to verify their age to open social media accounts. NetChoice, a trade association backed by tech companies like Meta and Google, is seeking to invalidate the age verification requirements in court.
separately, New Mexico jury Tuesday finds Metra violated state law In a lawsuit brought by state attorneys general, which accused the company of misleading users about the security of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, and enabling child sexual exploitation on those platforms.
After a six-week trial, the jury found that Meta violated New Mexico consumer protection law and ordered the company to pay US$375 million in civil penalties.
Another social media addiction Case brought by several states and school districts The lawsuit against the technology companies is expected to go to trial this summer in federal court in Oakland, California. Meanwhile, Matthew Bergman, one of the lawyers leading the plaintiffs’ cases, said an additional state trial is scheduled to begin in Los Angeles in July. This will include Instagram, YouTube, TikTok and Snapchat.
in Canada, More than a dozen Ontario school boards and independent schools are suing The parent companies of Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok alleged that these popular social media apps are designed for compulsive use and have reshaped how students who use these platforms think, behave and learn.
The allegations in the cases have not been proven in court.
Duncan Embury, head of litigation at Neinstein LLP, who is leading the Ontario lawsuit, says this week’s verdicts in Los Angeles and New Mexico mark a historic turning point in terms of “where we are in the conversation” about the harm social media causes to children.
While the U.S. rulings won’t directly affect the Ontario case, they do suggest that “the jury will have to face this evidence or what they can do with it,” Embury told CBC News on Wednesday afternoon.
“It gives us confidence that what we’ve been saying all along is something that needs to be said and something that needs to be acted upon.”
