U.S. jury finds Meta, YouTube liable in socmed addiction trial
Jurors also found that both companies knew or should have known their services posed a danger to minors.
Daily TribuneJurors also found that both companies knew or should have known their services posed a danger to minors.
SHE told jurors that her near-constant social media use ‘really affected my self-worth.’
Illustration by Gemini
LOS ANGELES, United States (AFP) — A Los Angeles jury on Wednesday found Meta and YouTube liable for harming a young woman because of an addictive design of their social media platforms, ordering the companies to pay $6 million in damages, including $3 million in punitive damages.
The verdict hands plaintiffs in more than a thousand similar pending cases significant leverage — and signals to the broader tech industry that juries are prepared to hold social media companies accountable for the mental health toll of their design choices.
The jury answered yes to all seven questions on verdict forms for both companies, finding that Meta and YouTube were negligent in the design and operation of their platforms and that their negligence was a substantial factor in causing harm to the plaintiff.
Jurors also found that both companies knew or should have known their services posed a danger to minors, that they failed to adequately warn users of that danger, and that a reasonable platform operator would have done so.
The panel awarded $3 million in compensatory damages, assigning Meta 70 percent of the responsibility for the plaintiff’s harm — a $2.1 million share — and YouTube the remaining 30 percent, or $900,000.
In a second phase, jurors added a further $3 million in total punitive damages after finding both companies had acted with malice, oppression or fraud.
Both companies said they would appeal the verdict.
“This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site,” Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda said.
A spokesperson for Meta said they “respectfully disagree with the verdict,” adding that “teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app.”
Nine of the 12 jurors further found that both companies had acted with malice, oppression or fraud, setting the stage for separate punitive damages.
The plaintiff, known in court documents by her initials K.G.M. and called Kaley at trial, began using YouTube when she was six, downloading the app on her iPod Touch to watch videos about lip gloss and an online kids game.
She joined Instagram at nine, getting around a block her mother had put in place to keep her off the platform.
She told jurors that her near-constant social media use “really affected my self-worth,” saying the apps led her to abandon hobbies, struggle to make friends and constantly measure herself against others.
Plaintiff attorney Mark Lanier cast the case as a story of corporate greed, saying that features like infinite scrolling, autoplay videos, notifications and like counts were engineered to drive compulsive use among young people.
