'Harming Children': Jury Finds Meta And YouTube Liable In Landmark Social Media Addiction Trial

 

Los Angeles : Meta and YouTube must pay millions in damages to a 20-year-old woman after a jury decided the social media giant and video streamer designed their platforms to hook young users without concern for their well-being.

The California jury's decision Wednesday in a first-of-its-kind lawsuit could influence the outcome of thousands of similar lawsuits accusing social media companies of deliberately causing harm.

The plaintiff, known by her initials KGM, testified at trial that she became addicted to social media as a child and that this addiction exacerbated her mental health struggles. After more than 40 hours of deliberations, a majority of jurors agreed and awarded her $3 million in damages.

Jurors later recommended an additional $3 million in punitive damages after deciding the companies acted with malice, oppression or fraud in harming children with their platforms. The judge has final say over how much damages are awarded.

 

It’s the second verdict against Meta this week, after a jury in New Mexico determined the company harms children’s mental health and safety, in violation of state law.

Meta, the parent of Instagram and Facebook, and Google-owned YouTube issued statements disagreeing with the verdict and vowed to explore their legal options, which include appeals.

Google spokesperson Jose Castañeda said the verdict misrepresents YouTube “which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site.” A Meta spokesperson said teen mental health is “profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app.”

Peter Ormerod, an associate professor of law at Villanova University, called the verdict “a momentous development" but noted it’s just "one step in a much longer saga” and that he doesn't expect to see large changes to the platforms immediately.

 

“I don’t think it is an unequivocal victory and I think there’s a long way to go before you see something akin to the master settlement that this is often analogized to in the tobacco and opioid litigation,” he said. To get to that kind of significant change in the platforms' operation, Ormerod said Meta and YouTube would likely have to lose their legal arguments on appeal and additional bellwether trials, or test cases, like this one would have to go against them.

The jury determined that Meta and YouTube were negligent in the design or operation of their respective platforms, and that the negligence was a substantial factor in causing harm to the plaintiff.

They also determined each company knew their platforms could be dangerous when used by a minor, and agreed that they failed to adequately warn of that danger, further contributing to the plaintiff's harm.

Only nine of the 12 jurors had to agree on each claim against each defendant. Two jurors consistently disagreed with the other 10 on whether the companies should be held liable, but a majority of the jury agreed on all seven claims against each company.

 

The jurors also decided Meta held more responsibility for harm to KGM, or Kaley, as her lawyers called her during the trial. The jury said Meta shouldered 70% of the responsibility while YouTube bore the remaining 30%. That division was reflected in the breakdown of the $3 million in punitive damages, with the jury deciding on $2.1 million from Meta and $900,000 from YouTube.

 

Meta and YouTube were the two remaining defendants in the case. TikTok and Snap settled before the trial began.

One juror, who did not feel comfortable sharing her full name, said to reporters outside the courtroom that Mark Zuckerberg's testimony, and how he “changed it back and forth,” did not “sit well” with the jury.

She also said they landed on the $6 million in damages even though some jurors were advocating for a higher amount because they were concerned about giving the sole plaintiff a larger lump sum all at once. But the jury still wanted the companies to understand they felt their practices were not acceptable.