A jury found both Meta and YouTube liable in a first-of-its-kind lawsuit that aimed to hold social media platforms responsible for harm to children using their services, awarding the plaintiff $3 million in damages. After more than 40 hours of deliberation across nine days, California jurors decided Meta and YouTube were negligent in the design or operation of their platforms.
The jury also decided each company's negligence was a substantial factor in causing harm to the plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman who says her use of social media as a child addicted her to the technology and exacerbated her mental health struggles, reports the AP. Standout points:
- The split: NBC News reports the jury found Meta 70% responsible for harm caused to the plaintiff, identified as KGM in documents, or Kaley as her lawyers called her during the trial; YouTube was found responsible for 30%.
- Kaley's testimony: She says she began using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 9 and told the jury she was on social media "all day long" as a child. Lawyers representing Kaley, led by Mark Lanier, were tasked with proving that the respective defendants' negligence was a substantial factor in causing Kaley's harm. They pointed to specific design features they said were designed to "hook" young users, like the "infinite" nature of feeds that allowed for an endless supply of content, autoplay features, and even notifications.
- Meta's counterargument: Meta consistently argued that Kaley had struggled with her mental health separate from her social media use, often pointing to her turbulent home life. Meta also said "not one of her therapists identified social media as the cause" of her mental health issues in a statement following closing arguments. But the plaintiffs did not have to prove that social media caused Kaley's struggles—only that it was a "substantial factor" in causing her harm.
- YouTube's counterargument: It focused less on Kaley's medical records and mental health history and more on her use of YouTube and the nature of the platform. They argued that YouTube is not a form of social media, but rather a video platform akin to television, and pointed to her declining YouTube use as she got older. According to their data, she spent about one minute a day on average watching YouTube Shorts since its inception in 2020.
- Bellwether trial: The case, along with several others, has been randomly selected as a bellwether trial, meaning its outcome could impact how thousands of similar lawsuits filed against social media companies play out. "This case is historic no matter what happens because it was the first," said Laura Marquez-Garrett, an attorney with the Social Media Victims Law Center, emphasizing the gravity of getting Meta and Google's internal documents into the public record.
- The multimillion-dollar verdict will grow: The jury decided the companies acted with malice, or highly egregious conduct, so they will hear new evidence shortly and head back into the deliberation room to decide on punitive damages.
- Others settled: Meta and Google-owned YouTube were the two remaining defendants in the case after TikTok and Snap each settled before the trial began.
,
uBlock 
,
and
Ghostery 
)
