A jury found Meta and YouTube responsible for creating products that caused addictive behavior in young users, awarding $6 million in damages. The decision, involving claims of negligence and failure to warn about adverse effects, could set a precedent for future legal action against social media companies. Meta bears 70% of responsibility, while YouTube shoulders 30%. Both companies plan to appeal the verdict.
A jury on Wednesday found that Meta and YouTube are liable for creating products that led to harmful and addictive behavior by young users, a landmark decision that could set a legal precedent for similar allegations brought against social media companies.
The jury awarded $3 million in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages to the lead plaintiff in the case, a woman named Kaley. Identified in court filings by her initials 'KGM,' she alleged that using YouTube and Instagram from a young age led to addictive use of the platforms and contributed to her mental health problems, including depression, body dysmorphia and suicidal thoughts. Jurors ruled that Meta and YouTube were negligent in designing and operating their platforms, factors that resulted in harm to the plaintiff. The jurors also found that the companies were aware that their platforms could have adverse effects on minors but failed to adequately warn users. Meta bears 70% of the responsibility, while YouTube shoulders 30%, the jury ruled.Jurors also decided the companies acted with 'malice, oppression or fraud,' accounting for the $3 million award in punitive damages. Of that amount, Meta will be responsible for paying $2.1 million, and YouTube must pay $900,000.The decision caps a weekslong trial that put Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri on the stand to defend their products in a case that drew comparisons to the tobacco industry lawsuits in the 1990s. Jurors deliberated in a Los Angeles courtroom for nine days for a total of more than 40 hours, at one point telling the judge that they were struggling to reach a consensus on one of the defendants. Although the jurors were not unanimous in their decision, a majority voted to hold both companies liable.'We respectfully disagree with the verdict and will appeal,' a Meta spokesperson told CBS News. '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, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online.'Google spokesperson Jose Castañeda also said it plans to appeal, saying the verdict misrepresents YouTube, 'which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site.' What 'KGM' allegedKaley, now 20, brought the case against Meta, which owns Instagram and Facebook, and Google-owned YouTube in 2023. TikTok and Snapchat parent Snap were named in the original complaint, but settled before the trial began in late January.During her testimony, Kaley described spending all day on social media and getting an emotional 'rush' from likes and notifications, keeping her glued to her phone.'For years, social media companies have profited from targeting children while concealing the addictive and dangerous design features built into their platforms,' Kaley's attorney, Mark Lanier of Lanier Law Firm, said in a statement. 'Today, we finally have accountability.' Throughout the trial, Lanier argued that Meta and YouTube were aware that their social media products harmed children, but continued to prioritize profits over safety. Meta and YouTube faced two main allegations: negligence and failure to warn users of the potential health risks from using the platforms.Social media companies have long deflected such accusations by taking legal refuge behind Section 230, a clause in the 1996 Communications Decency Act that protects internet companies from liability for third-party content posted on their platforms. This case, however, centered around how the apps are designed, not the content itself. On Tuesday, in another first-of-its-kind case, a New Mexico jury found Meta violated state child exploitation laws and ordered the company to pay $375 million in civil penalties. The decision came after just a day of deliberations. Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said in a post on X that the company plans to appeal that decision, and that 'we will continue to defend ourselves vigorously, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online.'New Mexico is the first state to win a case against a major tech company for harming young people.The companies' defense: Don't blame social media During the Los Angeles trial, Meta and YouTube denied that Kaley's use of social media led to her mental health issues. The companies also argued that her family history, difficulties at home and school and learning disabilities played a more significant role in her psychological and emotional struggles. 'Not one of her therapists identified social media as the cause,' a Meta spokesperson said in a statement to CBS News earlier this month.Several mental health specialists who treated Kaley testified during the trial, including Victoria Burke, a former therapist who worked with the plaintiff in 2019. During her testimony, Burke said that social media and Kaley's sense of self 'were closely related,' adding that activity on the platforms could 'make or break her mood.'Attorneys representing the technology companies also argued that Kaley turned to their platforms as a coping mechanism or a means of escaping her mental health struggles.Key questions at trialThe driving question behind the trial was whether Meta and YouTube designed their products to be addictive. When Zuckerberg and Instagram's Mosseri took the stand in February, they faced questions over whether the companies deliberately sought to increase the amount of time users spent on their platforms.Zuckerberg, who co-founded Facebook, was also asked about Instagram's age restrictions and whether the platform does enough to prevent underage people from accessing the app. Kaley claimed she started using Instagram at age 9 and YouTube at 6.Instagram says it requires users to be at least 13 years old to create an account. However, Zuckerberg said during his testimony that the rule can be difficult to enforce because there are 'a meaningful number of people who lie about their age to use our services.'The plaintiff's legal team also pressed Zuckerberg and Mosseri over Instagram's beauty filters, which they said played an important role in Kaley's social media use. During her testimony, Kaley said she did not experience the negative feelings associated with her body dysmorphia diagnosis before she began using social media and filters.Opening the legal floodgate? Legal experts said the jury's decision could have implications for thousands of other lawsuits, including from state attorneys general, school districts and other plaintiffs, alleging harm by social media companies. Clay Calvert, a nonresident senior fellow of technology policy studies at the nonpartisan American Enterprise Institute, told CBS News that the damages awarded in the trial will set a benchmark for similar cases brought against social media players, while the ruling could also encourage more families with minors to take legal action.'It definitely could open the floodgates of litigation,' he said. 'It will certainly trigger more.'
Social Media Mental Health Addiction Legal Liability Meta
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Meta Found Liable for Harm to Children's Mental Health in New Mexico CaseA New Mexico jury ruled that Meta, the parent company of Instagram and Facebook, violated state consumer protection law and is responsible for harming children's mental health. The landmark decision follows a trial focused on Meta's prioritization of profits over safety, with the jury finding thousands of violations and assessing penalties. The case is one of the first in a wave of litigation regarding social media platforms and their impact on children.
Read more »
Meta Found Liable in New Mexico for Harm to Children's Mental HealthA New Mexico jury ruled that Meta, the parent company of Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp, is liable for harming children's mental health and violating state consumer protection law. The jury found Meta prioritized profits over safety, engaged in misleading practices, and failed to adequately address the risks of child exploitation on its platforms. The ruling could result in substantial penalties.
Read more »
Meta and YouTube found liable in social media addiction trialA California jury has found Meta and YouTube liable on all counts in a case that accused the tech giants of intentionally addicting a young woman and injuring her mental health.
Read more »
Meta and YouTube found liable on all charges in landmark social media addiction trialThe verdict, which caps a weeks-long trial in Los Angeles, could set a legal precedent for similar allegations brought against social media companies.
Read more »
Jury finds Meta and YouTube liable in landmark social media addiction trialA jury has found Instagram and YouTube liable in a first-of-its-kind lawsuit that questioned whether they should be held responsible for harm to children using their respective platforms.
Read more »
Meta and YouTube found liable of negligence in landmark social media addiction trialJurors found YouTube and Meta negligent in a potentially landmark Los Angeles trial over social media addiction.
Read more »