Meta, Google found liable, jury doubles verdict in social media addiction trial
A major setback that's likely to lead to a stream of litigation and regulation
After deliberating for more than a week, a Los Angeles jury today found that Google and Meta’s social media platforms are designed to trap children into a lifetime of infinite scrolling, endless video replays, notifications and general algorithmic serfdom,
The jury found Meta liable for $4.2 million in damages and Google for $1.8 million, small amounts for two of the world’s most valuable companies but highly significant as precedents that will likely spawn endless litigation elsewhere.
“Today’s verdict is a referendum — from a jury, to an entire industry — that accountability has arrived,” the plaintiff’s lead counsel said in a statement.
The lawsuit centered on a woman identified in court only as K.G.M. She’s now 20 years old but claims that she became “hooked” on social media when she began using Google’s YouTube at age 6 and Meta’s Instagram at 9. She said her compulsive use caused depression, anxiety, self-harm and body image issues.
“This is the first time in history a jury has heard testimony by executives and seen internal documents that we believe prove these companies chose profits over children,” said Joseph VanZandt, one of K.G.M.’s lawyers, according to The New York Times.
Negligent design of social media products
The jury found Google and Meta were negligent in the design of both apps and failed to warn about their dangers. The plaintiff’s lawyers focused on platform design rather than content, making it harder for the companies to stave off liability.
The verdict is a “setback” for Meta and Google, said Gil Luria, a technology sector analyst at investment firm D.A. Davidson, in a Reuters report.
“This process will likely get dragged out through future cases and appeals, but eventually may cause these companies to put in consumer safeguards that may dampen growth,” he said.
Snap and TikTok were also defendants in the trial. Both settled with the plaintiff before it began. Terms of the agreements were not disclosed.
Lawyers argued that the companies had purposely “engineered addiction” into the programs. Evidence introduced in the case has included internal documents purporting to show that company executives were aware of the addictive effects.
Both companies disputed the verdicts and said they would appeal.
Thousands of similar lawsuits have already been filed by families, schools and states. Some lawyers have compared the case to early litigation around tobacco’s addictive and harmful effects, which eventually resulted in a master settlement agreement of more than $200 billion in 1998.
The cases have been compared to those against Big Tobacco last century, the tobacco companies were accused of hiding information about the harms of cigarettes. The companies reached a $206 billion master settlement with more than 40 states in 1998 that led to an agreement to stop marketing to minors. Strict tobacco regulations and a decline in smoking followed.
Concerns about the effects of social media on children have been growing in recent years. In 2024, the U.S. surgeon general called for adding warning labels and in December, Australia barred children under 16 from using social media, according to press reports. Malaysia, Spain and Denmark are considering similar rules.