YouTube, Meta Liable In Landmark Case Holding Giants Responsible For Kids' Social Media Addictions

A jury on Wednesday found YouTube and Meta liable in a first-of-its-kind lawsuit accusing the social media companies of using addictive practices that contributed to mental health and other harms in children.

The verdict was handed down after nine days of deliberations by a Los Angeles Superior Court jury. The jury awarded a total of $3 million in damages, with Meta — the parent company of Facebook and Instagram — directed to pay 70% of that amount, and YouTube 30%.

The verdict will grow, as the jury decided the companies acted with malice, or highly egregious conduct, meaning they will hear new evidence shortly and head back into the deliberation room to decide on punitive damages.

The lawsuit centered around a plaintiff identified as Kaley, a 20-year-old Chico resident. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg was among those who testified.

Kaley testified she began using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 9. She said she was on social media "all day long" as a child and that her early use of the platforms left her addicted to technology and exacerbated her mental health struggles.

Kaley's attorneys were faced with proving that the tech companies' negligence was a substantial factor in causing her harm. They argued that specific design features on the social media platforms were designed to "hook" young users — like the infinite scrolling of Instagram and Facebook feeds that provide an endless supply of content.

Attorney Mark Lanier described the tactics as "engineered addiction" and likened the content of the platforms to a Trojan horse: Users are drawn in by the content's "wonderful and great" appearance, but find themselves taken over by it, he argued.

Meta's attorneys argued that Kaley had struggled with mental health issues separate from her social media use and had a turbulent home life. But the plaintiffs did not have to prove that social media caused her struggles — only that it was a “substantial factor” in causing her harm.

YouTube argued that its platform is not a form of social media, but rather a video platform akin to television, and pointed to her declining YouTube use as she got older.

"Ask whether anybody suffering from addiction could say, 'Yeah I kinda lost interest.' What does your common sense tell you about that?" YouTube attorney Luis Li said.

Kaley testified that as a child, she wanted to be on social media sites "all the time," feeling that if she was not logged on she would "miss out on something," which would send her "into a panic."

She said she believed she had uploaded more than 200 videos to YouTube by age 10, but her attorney corrected her and said it was actually more than 300.

Lawyers representing both platforms also consistently pointed to the safety features and guardrails they each have available for people to monitor and customize their use. And they questioned the concept of social media being an addiction.

Zuckerberg testified that those under the age of 13 are prohibited from using his company's platforms, though there are people who do so anyway.

He said the company removes users who are found to be underage. Kaley was under the age limit when she began using the products, and Zuckerberg suggested it is up to users to read the terms.

That drew a rebuke from a plaintiff's attorney who questioned whether Meta actually expected young children to read the rules regarding the platform's use.

Kaley's attorneys contend that despite the platform's prohibition of preteen users, as many as 4 million such children access Meta's Instagram.

Kaley said her addiction to social media led her to develop body-image issues, due in part to filters used to aesthetically enhance photos on Instagram. She also said she gave up on hobbies and other activities so she could focus on social media, which also made it difficult for her to make friends at school since she was so focused on her phone.

Kaley said the often-enhanced images she would see on the sites would make her "feel very depressed," leaving her insecure about her own looks. She said she ultimately was unable to sleep and began contemplating suicide. She said she began cutting herself as a "coping mechanism."

Two other major social media companies, TikTok and Snap, were originally defendants in the lawsuit. Both reached settlements before the trial began.

For years, social media companies have disputed allegations that they harm children’s mental health through deliberate design choices that addict kids to their platforms and fail to protect them from sexual predators and dangerous content.

This case was being closely watched as a possible indicator of the fate of thousands of similar lawsuits that are still pending. Several lawsuits filed across the country are headed to trial, all seeking to hold companies responsible for what happens on their platforms.

The lawsuits have come from school districts, local, state and the federal government as well as thousands of families. The courtroom showdowns are the culmination of years of scrutiny of the platforms over child safety, and whether deliberate design choices make them addictive and serve up content that leads to depression, eating disorders or suicide.

The outcomes could challenge the companies’ First Amendment shield and Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which protects tech companies from liability for material posted on their platforms. They could also be costly in the form of legal fees and settlements. And they could force the companies to change how they operate, potentially losing users and advertising dollars.

Material from the Associated Press and City News Service was used in this report.