Meta and YouTube Deemed Negligent in Pivotal Social Media Addiction Case

Meta and YouTube Deemed Negligent in Pivotal Social Media Addiction Case

2 Min Read

Legal challenges are just beginning for social media giants. A pivotal trial regarding social media addiction accusations against Meta’s Instagram and Google’s YouTube concluded that the companies neglected to caution users about potential risks. This negligence significantly contributed to mental health problems faced by a 20-year-old woman, Kaley G.M., who used both platforms. The jury awarded a $3 million compensation, with Meta bearing 70% of the liability. The jury determined punitive damages were necessary and will deliberate further on the sum. Although two jurors sided with the defense, the decision was not required to be unanimous. During the trial, Kaley and her therapist testified about her struggles with body image and obsessive platform use. Meta’s spokesperson, Andy Stone, disagreed with the outcome and said the company is weighing legal options. Google has yet to comment.

After nine days of jury deliberation following a five-week trial in Los Angeles Superior Court, various testimonies were heard, including those from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and former employee whistleblowers, as well as Kaley and her therapist. The case attracted media attention and parent advocates seeking to raise awareness about social media dangers. This lawsuit is among the first in a series aiming to hold social media companies accountable, with Snap and TikTok settling with Kaley before trial commencement.

For plaintiffs’ co-leads, this ruling represents a significant victory for families affected by social media’s impact on children. It signals industry accountability, having benefited from targeting young users while obscuring harmful design aspects.

Separately, a New Mexico jury found Meta had knowingly breached state law regarding product safety disclosures.

Attorneys handling these cases, including those arising from LA state court and federal court in Oakland, CA, see this verdict and the upcoming bellwether trials as informative regarding juries’ potential stances on new product liability issues, especially concerning Section 230. A global settlement, possibly entailing platform changes, may ensue.

You might also like