A Los Angeles jury has delivered a major verdict in the trial examining whether major tech platforms can be held accountable for childhood social media harm linked to their products. Jurors concluded that Meta and YouTube were negligent in how they designed and operated their platforms, siding with a 20-year-old plaintiff identified as K.G.M., also referred to as Kaley.
The jury determined that Meta and Google’s YouTube contributed to a woman’s depression and anxiety stemming from compulsive social media use during her childhood. The court awarded her $3 million in compensatory damages, with Meta responsible for 70%, and YouTube responsible for 30%. The jury later decided on an additional $3 million in punitive damages, bringing the total damages owed to the plaintiff up to $6 million. Meta would pay $4.2 million, and YouTube $1.8 million.
The verdict follows a separate decision in New Mexico, where a jury found Meta liable for failing to protect children from online exploitation and ordered the company to pay $375 million—an outcome Meta says it plans to appeal.
The case marks a pivotal moment in a wave of lawsuits accusing social media companies of creating features that encourage compulsive use among young people. After more than a month of testimony—including appearances from executives like Mark Zuckerberg—and nearly 44 hours of deliberation across nine days, jurors determined the companies’ actions were a “substantial factor” in the plaintiff’s mental health struggles.
Kaley testified that she began using YouTube at age six and Instagram at nine, eventually spending nearly all her time on social media. She said the constant engagement contributed to depression, anxiety, and body image issues, adding that it “really affected my self-worth.” She also described feeling compelled to stay online and fearing she would miss out if she logged off. Her legal team argued that platform features—such as endless scrolling feeds, autoplay videos, and persistent notifications—were intentionally designed to keep users hooked, particularly vulnerable children. They emphasized that the case focused on product design rather than user-generated content, a strategy aimed at avoiding legal protections under Section 230, which typically shields tech companies from liability for what users post.
Attorneys for Meta and YouTube pushed back, maintaining their platforms are not inherently harmful and pointing instead to Kaley’s difficult upbringing and prior mental health challenges. Meta argued that her struggles predated social media use and noted that “not one of her therapists identified social media as the cause.” YouTube’s defense also stressed limited evidence of addiction to its platform specifically.
The trial is the first in a group of thousands of similar cases brought by families and school districts nationwide, making it a bellwether that could influence future outcomes. Legal experts have compared the growing wave of social media litigation to the tobacco industry lawsuits of the 1990s, suggesting the tech sector could face increased scrutiny and significant financial consequences.
Editorial credit: FotoField / Shutterstock.com
