In the prosecution of Meta and YouTube for social media addiction, jurors consider the evidence
Jurors in Los Angeles will return to court on Monday to continue deliberations in a major trial accusing Meta and YouTube of designing platforms that can hook young users and harm their mental health.
The case was filed by a 20-year-old California woman identified as Kaley G.M. She told the court that she became obsessed with social media from a very young age, starting with YouTube videos when she was six years old. According to her testimony, spending large amounts of time on YouTube and later on Instagram worsened her depression and contributed to suicidal thoughts during her childhood.
Jurors began reviewing the evidence privately on Friday after receiving legal instructions from the judge. Their verdict will depend largely on whether they believe the woman’s mental health struggles were primarily caused by social media platforms or by difficulties in her personal life. During cross-examination, Kaley also spoke about feeling neglected and criticized by family members, which defense lawyers suggested could have played a role in her emotional problems.
The jury has been asked to determine whether Meta or YouTube should have known that their services could pose dangers to children and whether the companies were negligent in the way their platforms were designed. If jurors conclude that the platforms were responsible, they must then decide whether the companies were a “substantial factor” in causing Kaley’s problems and how much money should be awarded as damages.
The trial has featured testimony from senior executives. Mark Zuckerberg appeared in court and rejected accusations that his company had failed to protect underage users or had deliberately profited from their usage. Cristos Goodrow, vice president of engineering at YouTube, also testified that the company’s goal is to provide value to users rather than encourage harmful binge-watching, despite the platform’s strong growth targets.
The lawsuit is one of hundreds of cases filed in the United States accusing social media companies of creating addictive platforms that contribute to depression, eating disorders, psychiatric hospitalisation and even suicide among young users. Technology companies have often relied on Section 230, which protects online platforms from liability for content posted by users. In this case, however, the argument is that the platforms themselves are defective products because they are intentionally designed to keep people engaged and constantly consuming content.
The outcome of the Los Angeles trial could influence many similar lawsuits against social media firms and may shape future legal standards for how tech companies design and manage platforms used by children and teenagers.
