LOS ANGELES (Reuters) — In a landmark verdict with potential widespread implications, a Los Angeles jury on Wednesday found Meta and Alphabet’s Google negligent in the design of their social media platforms, ruling that these platforms are harmful to young users. The $6 million verdict is expected to set a precedent for numerous similar cases alleging social media addiction and its detrimental effects.
The jury awarded $4.2 million in damages against Meta and $1.8 million against Google. While these sums are relatively small for companies with annual capital spending exceeding $100 billion each, the verdict’s significance lies in its potential to influence future litigation and industry practices.
The Los Angeles trial served as a bellwether, or test case, for thousands of similar lawsuits consolidated in California state courts, all centered around the impact of social media on young people.
The case specifically involved a 20-year-old woman, referred to as Kaley in court. The plaintiff alleged that she developed an addiction to Google’s YouTube and Meta’s Instagram at a young age due to the platforms’ attention-grabbing design features, including the “infinite scroll” which encourages continuous engagement with new content.
The jury concluded that Google and Meta were indeed negligent in the design of their respective apps, and further, that they failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers associated with their platforms.
“Today’s verdict is a referendum — from a jury, to an entire industry — that accountability has arrived,” stated the plaintiff’s lead counsel, emphasizing the broader implications of the ruling.
Both Meta and Google have expressed their disagreement with the verdict and have indicated their intention to appeal the decision, according to spokespeople for each company.
Despite the verdict, shares of Meta closed up 0.3 percent, and Google’s parent company, Alphabet, finished 0.2 percent higher, suggesting a limited immediate impact on the companies’ stock performance.
US law generally provides strong protection to social media companies from liability for user-generated content. However, the Los Angeles case focused on the platforms’ design itself, circumventing these protections and opening a new avenue for legal challenges.
According to Gil Luria, a technology sector analyst at investment firm D.A. Davidson, the verdict represents a “setback” for Meta and Google.
“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,” Luria stated, highlighting the potential long-term consequences for the companies.
Snap and TikTok, which were also named as defendants in the trial, reached settlements with the plaintiff before the trial commenced. The specific terms of these agreements remain undisclosed.
In recent years, large technology companies in the US have faced growing criticism regarding child and teen safety on their platforms. The focus of this debate has now extended to the courts and state governments, although the US Congress has yet to pass comprehensive legislation regulating social media.
According to the nonpartisan National Conference of State Legislatures, at least 20 states enacted laws related to social media usage and children last year, including measures regulating cellphone use in schools and requiring age verification for social media accounts. NetChoice, a trade association supported by tech giants like Meta and Google, is currently challenging age verification requirements in court.
Following the verdict, US Senators Marsha Blackburn (Republican) and Richard Blumenthal (Democrat) issued statements calling on Congress to enact legislation that would mandate social media companies to prioritize children’s safety in their platform designs.
A separate social media addiction case, brought by several states and school districts against technology companies, is scheduled to go to trial this summer in federal court in Oakland, California.
Another state trial is slated to begin in Los Angeles in July, according to Matthew Bergman, one of the attorneys leading the cases for the plaintiffs. This trial will involve Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, and Snapchat.
In a related development, a New Mexico jury on Tuesday found Meta in violation of state law in a lawsuit filed by the state’s attorney general. The lawsuit accused Meta of misleading users about the safety of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, and of enabling child sexual exploitation on these platforms.
During the trial, the plaintiff’s lawyers presented evidence suggesting that Meta and Google intentionally targeted younger users and prioritized profit over safety. Conversely, Meta’s attorneys emphasized the plaintiff’s difficult childhood as a contributing factor to her mental health struggles, while YouTube argued that her platform usage was minimal.
Jurors were presented with internal documents revealing the companies’ efforts to attract younger users and heard testimony from executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who defended the companies’ decisions.
When questioned about Meta’s decision to lift a temporary ban on beauty filters, which some inside Meta had warned could be harmful to teen girls, Zuckerberg stated that he believed in allowing users to express themselves.
“I felt like the evidence wasn’t clear enough to support limiting people’s expression,” he explained.
The role of free speech and content moderation in the companies’ decision-making processes is likely to be a significant aspect of any potential appeal.
