US Jury has found Meta and YouTube negligent in a landmark social media addiction case and awarded $3 million to plaintiff.
NewsOnline Nigeria reports that a jury in Los Angeles has found Meta Platforms Inc. and YouTube negligent in the design and operation of their social media platforms, delivering a landmark verdict in the first trial to hold major technology companies accountable for social media addiction.
The Los Angeles County Superior Court jury ruled that the companies’ negligence was a substantial factor in causing harm to the plaintiff, identified in court by the initials K.G.M., and that both firms failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers associated with their platforms, Instagram and YouTube.
Jurors awarded the now 20-year-old plaintiff $3 million in compensatory damages, assigning 70 per cent of the responsibility to Meta and 30 per cent to YouTube.
ALSO: Iran Denies Talks With U.S. After Trump Claims Negotiations to End Middle East Conflict
The trial, which began last month, is the first bellwether case in a consolidated group of lawsuits involving more than 1,600 plaintiffs. These include over 350 families and more than 250 school districts alleging that social media platforms contributed to addiction and mental health issues among young users.
During the proceedings, Mark Zuckerberg and other technology executives testified before the court.
Following the verdict, families who claim their children were harmed by social media celebrated outside the courthouse, saying the ruling made them feel “vindicated.”
However, representatives for Meta and Google, the parent company of YouTube, said they disagree with the verdict and plan to appeal.
A Meta spokesperson argued that teen mental health issues are complex and cannot be attributed to a single application.
“Teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app,” the spokesperson said, adding that the company remains confident in its efforts to protect young users online.
José Castañeda, a spokesperson for Google, also criticised the decision, saying the case mischaracterised YouTube, describing it as a “responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site.”
In a joint statement, lawyers representing the plaintiff described the ruling as a historic milestone for families affected by social media addiction.
“For years, social media companies have profited from targeting children while concealing their addictive and dangerous design features,” the attorneys said, adding that the verdict sends a strong signal that the industry must now face accountability.
The jury allocated $2.1 million in damages against Meta and $900,000 against YouTube far less than the $1 billion in punitive damages sought by the plaintiff’s legal team.
The plaintiff testified that her heavy use of social media during her teenage years contributed to depression, anxiety, and body dysmorphia.
She told the court that she felt compelled to remain constantly active on the platforms and feared missing out whenever she logged off.
Attorneys representing the technology companies disputed those claims, arguing that their platforms were not intentionally designed to be addictive.
A Meta spokesperson also claimed the plaintiff’s mental health struggles were linked to earlier personal challenges, including alleged emotional and physical abuse during her childhood.
Meanwhile, the verdict comes amid growing legal scrutiny of technology companies over online safety.
In a separate case earlier this week, a jury in New Mexico found Meta liable for failing to protect children from online predators on Facebook and Instagram, ordering the company to pay $375 million in civil penalties.
The Los Angeles verdict could influence dozens of similar cases across the United States. Legal experts say it may set an important precedent for future lawsuits seeking to hold social media companies accountable for the impact of their platforms on young users.
Matt Bergman, founding attorney of the Social Media Victims Law Center, said the decision establishes a framework for evaluating similar cases nationwide.
“Families pursuing justice in other jurisdictions can now point to this outcome as proof that these claims deserve to be heard and taken seriously,” he said.
The jury deliberated for nearly 44 hours over nine days before reaching its verdict.
Legal analysts say the case is particularly significant because internet companies have long relied on protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields online platforms from liability for content posted by users.
The lawsuit filed by K.G.M. is the first civil action to successfully argue that social media platforms themselves can be held responsible for allegedly causing addiction and mental health harm.
Meanwhile, other technology companies initially named in the lawsuit, including TikTok and Snap Inc., reached settlements before the trial but still face similar lawsuits expected to proceed to court later this year.
