IANS
Washington
A US jury has found Meta and YouTube liable in a landmark case, ruling that their platforms harmed a young user through addictive design features and failed to warn of risks to children and teens.
Delivered by a Los Angeles court, the ruling marks one of the most significant legal setbacks for major social media companies in years. Jurors found Instagram’s parent Meta and Google-owned YouTube negligent for operating products that harmed young users and for failing to adequately warn about those dangers.
The case was brought by a 20-year-old woman, identified as Kaley G.M., who testified that her use of the platforms began in childhood and dominated her life for years. She said it contributed to mental health issues, including anxiety, depression, and body dysmorphia.
The jury awarded her $3 million in damages and an additional $3 million in punitive damages. Jurors were nearly unanimous in their findings across multiple questions
before them.
Kaley told the court she began watching YouTube videos at age six and created an Instagram account at nine. She said her engagement with the platforms intensified over time. “I wanted to be on it all the time,” she said. “If I wasn’t on it, I felt like I was going to miss out on something.”
Her lawyer, Mark Lanier, argued that the companies knowingly designed their platforms to keep children engaged. He told jurors the damages should serve to “punish a wrongdoing” and “to discourage similar conduct in the future.” He added, “They knew! They targeted the children.”
The defence pushed back, arguing that the plaintiff’s struggles were influenced by other factors, including personal circumstances and bullying. Company executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri, rejected claims that their platforms were designed to be addictive.
Zuckerberg said the company’s aim was to provide useful services, not maximise user time. “We used to give teams goals on time spent, and we don’t do that anymore because I don’t think that’s the best way to do it,” he told the court.
Meta said it would appeal the verdict. “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,” said company spokesman Andy Stone.
YouTube also plans to challenge the ruling. “This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site,” said Jose Castaneda, a spokesman for Google.
The case is being closely watched as a test for thousands of similar lawsuits. More than 3,000 cases are pending in California courts alone, targeting companies including Meta, YouTube, Snapchat and TikTok. Some platforms settled claims
before trial.
Legal experts say the verdict could influence how courts assess claims related to social media and mental health, especially among minors. It may also encourage settlements as companies reassess
legal risks.
The ruling follows another recent decision in New Mexico, where a jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million in a separate case involving child safety concerns.
Globally, scrutiny of social media’s impact on young users has been growing. Governments in several countries are considering stricter safeguards, including age restrictions, parental controls and limits on addictive features.
