Alain Sherter and <\/p>\n
Aimee Picchi\n <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
A jury on Wednesday found that Meta and YouTube are liable <\/strong>for creating products that led to harmful and addictive behavior by young users, a landmark decision that could set a legal precedent for similar allegations brought against social media companies.\u00a0<\/p>\n The jury voted to award $3 million in damages to the lead plaintiff in the case, a woman named Kaley \u2014 identified in court filings by her initials “KGM” \u2014 who alleged that using YouTube and Instagram from a young age led to addictive use of the platforms and contributed to her mental health problems, including depression, body dysmorphia and suicidal thoughts.\u00a0<\/p>\n The decision caps a weeks-long trial<\/span> that put Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg<\/span> and Instagram head Adam Mosseri on the stand to defend their products in a case that drew comparisons to the tobacco industry lawsuits in the 1990s. Jurors deliberated in a Los Angeles courtroom for over a week, at one point telling the judge that they were struggling to reach a consensus on one of the defendants.<\/p>\n Kaley brought the case against Meta, which owns Instagram and Facebook, and Google-owned YouTube in 2023. TikTok and Snapchat parent Snap were named in the original complaint, but settled before the trial began in late January.<\/p>\n During her testimony, Kaley, now 20 years old, described <\/strong>spending all day<\/span> on social media and getting an emotional “rush” from likes and notifications, keeping her glued to her phone.<\/p>\n Her attorney, Mark Lanier of Lanier Law Firm, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.\u00a0<\/p>\n Throughout the trial, Lanier argued that Meta and YouTube were aware that their social media products harmed children, but continued to prioritize profits over safety.\u00a0<\/p>\n Meta and YouTube faced two main allegations: negligence and failure to warn users of the potential health risks from using the platforms.<\/p>\n Social media companies have long used Section 230, a clause in the law that prevents internet companies from liability for third-party content posted on them, to avoid legal action. This case, however, centered around how the apps are designed, not the content itself.\u00a0<\/p>\n “We respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options,” a Meta spokesperson told CBS News, noting that jurors were not unanimous in issuing the decision.<\/p>\n Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the verdict.\u00a0<\/p>\n On Tuesday, in another first-of-its-kind case, a New Mexico jury found Meta violated state child exploitation laws and ordered the company to pay $375 million in civil penalties. The decision came after just a day of deliberations.\u00a0<\/p>\n Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said in a post on X that the company plans to appeal that decision, and that “we will continue to defend ourselves vigorously, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online.”<\/p>\n New Mexico is the first state to win a case against a major tech company for harming young people.<\/p>\n During the Los Angeles trial, Meta and YouTube denied that Kaley’s use of social media led to her mental health issues. The companies also argued that her family history, difficulties at home and school and learning disabilities played a more significant role in her psychological and emotional struggles. \u00a0<\/p>\n “Not one of her therapists identified social media as the cause,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement to CBS News earlier this month.<\/p>\n Several mental health specialists who treated Kaley testified during the trial, including Victoria Burke, a former therapist who worked with the plaintiff in 2019. During her testimony, Burke said that social media and Kaley’s sense of self “were closely related,” adding that activity on the platforms could “make or break her mood.”<\/p>\n Attorneys representing the technology companies also argued that Kaley turned to their platforms as a coping mechanism or a means of escaping her mental health struggles.<\/p>\nWhat “KGM” alleged<\/h2>\n
The companies’ defense: Don’t blame social media\u00a0<\/h2>\n