Council News
Link copied

Tech Giants Found Liable in Landmark Social Media Addiction Trial

Rights & Justice· 12 sources ·Updated 3h ago
Left
Center
Right
See why this story leans left

The Council rated this article as leaning left due to its framing of the verdict as a victory for holding tech companies accountable, while downplaying the companies' arguments and focusing on the potential for future lawsuits against them.

See how other outlets covered this
PBS NewsHour Leans Left
Jury finds Meta and YouTube liable in landmark youth addiction case
PBS NewsHour frames the verdict as a historic moment in holding tech companies accountable for designing addictive platforms that harm children and teens. They emphasize the speed of the verdict and the potential impact on other similar lawsuits.
See the council’s votes

A jury found Meta and Google liable in an addiction trial, resulting in a verdict that establishes legal accountability for social media platforms' design practices affecting minors.

The jury's finding that Meta and Google are responsible for addiction-related harms in a trial signifies a legal precedent that could impact tech companies' accountability for user welfare.

See bias & truth review

Jury's Verdict

A Los Angeles jury found Meta and YouTube negligent in the design of their social media platforms, awarding $6 million in damages to a woman identified as K.G.M. The $6 million includes $3 million in punitive damages. The jury determined that Meta will be liable for 70% of the damages, while Google will be responsible for the remaining 30%.

Plaintiff's Testimony

K.G.M., also known as Kaley, testified that her early use of social media led to depression, anxiety, and body dysmorphia. She started using YouTube at age six and Instagram around age nine. By the time she finished elementary school, she had posted 284 videos on YouTube. K.G.M. told the court, "I stopped engaging with family because I was spending all my time on social media."

Negligence Claims

The jury found that Meta had been negligent in designing or operating Instagram, and that this negligence was a substantial factor in harming the plaintiff. The jury also found Google had been negligent in designing or operating YouTube and that this negligence was a substantial factor in harming the plaintiff. Jurors determined that both companies knew or should have known their services posed a danger to minors, that they failed to adequately warn users of that danger, and that a reasonable platform operator would have done so.

Company Responses

A Meta spokesperson said that they "respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options." Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda said the verdict misrepresents YouTube “which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site”. Meta president Dina Powell McCormick said that they are appealing the decision.

Similar Cases

The verdict hands plaintiffs in more than a thousand similar pending cases significant leverage. The verdict signaled to the broader tech industry that juries were prepared to hold social media companies accountable for the mental health toll of their design choices. The day before the jury’s decision in the KGM trial, a separate jury in New Mexico ordered Meta to pay $375 million over harms to young users.

Impact of the Ruling

The plaintiffs' counsel said, "This verdict sends an unmistakable message that no company is above accountability when it comes to our children." Another bellwether social media trial is set to begin in June in federal court. This trial puts together nationwide cases from attorneys general, school districts, local governments and families.

Get today’s full briefing

5 stories left to complete

Sources (12)

Cross-referenced to ensure accuracy

Never miss a story.
Get the full experience. Free on iOS.
Download for iOS