Meta and YouTube Held Liable in Pivotal Social Media Addiction Lawsuit
A jury recently reached a significant verdict in a trial examining claims of social media addiction against Meta’s Instagram and Google’s YouTube, concluding that both companies neglected to inform users about the potential risks associated with their platforms. This negligence was deemed a key factor in the mental health challenges faced by a 20-year-old woman, Kaley G.M., who had used both services.
The jury awarded a total of $3 million in compensatory damages, with Meta accountable for 70% of that amount, as reported by a firm representing the plaintiffs, including Kaley. The jury also indicated that punitive damages were justified and will further discuss the appropriate sum to be awarded. All ten jurors agreed on the plaintiff’s side regarding the negligence of both Meta and YouTube and its significant role in the harm experienced by Kaley. During the trial, Kaley and her therapist shared insights into her struggles with body dysmorphia and her compulsive use of the platforms. While two jurors sided with the defense, a unanimous decision was not required for the verdict.
Meta spokesperson Francis Brennan expressed disagreement with the verdict, stating, “Teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app. We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously as every case is different, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online.” Similarly, Google spokesperson José Castañeda stated, “This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site,” and also indicated plans to appeal.
The jury deliberated for nine days following a five-week trial at the Los Angeles Superior Court, which included testimonies from company executives like Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, former employees, and Kaley along with her therapist. The trial attracted attention from reporters and parent advocates raising awareness about the potential dangers of social media. This case marks the first of several key lawsuits proceeding in the courthouse, with similar claims against various social media platforms. Notably, Snap and TikTok settled their cases with Kaley prior to the trial.
The co-lead counsels for the plaintiffs remarked, “Today’s verdict is a historic moment — for Kaley and for the thousands of children and families who have been waiting for this day. But this verdict is bigger than one case. For years, social media companies have profited from targeting children while concealing their addictive and dangerous design features. Today’s verdict is a referendum — from a jury, to an entire industry — that accountability has arrived.”
In a related development, a separate jury in New Mexico recently found that Meta had willfully violated state law by misleading consumers about the safety of its products.
Thousands of lawsuits from individuals, school districts, and state attorneys general are part of two distinct groups of complaints filed in the LA state court and a federal court in Oakland, CA. The outcome of Kaley’s case, along with upcoming bellwether cases, will provide insights for attorneys on how juries may respond to new questions of product liability. There is particular interest in how these cases will interact with Section 230, which has historically shielded social media companies from liability for user-generated content. The results could lead to a global settlement that might include changes to the platforms themselves.
