Three of the world’s biggest tech companies face a landmark trial in Los Angeles over claims that their platforms deliberately addict and harm children.
At a Glance
- Three of the world’s biggest tech companies face a trial over child harm claims.
- Jury selection begins this week; the trial will last 6-8 weeks.
- The case centers on a 19-year-old plaintiff, KGM, and could set precedent for future lawsuits.
- Why it matters: The outcome could reshape how these platforms design features for minors and influence regulatory and legal standards.
Los Angeles County Superior Court is set to hear a lawsuit that pits Meta’s Instagram, ByteDance’s TikTok and Google’s YouTube against a 19-year-old plaintiff, KGM. The case, which starts with jury selection this week, could determine whether these platforms are legally responsible for the mental health harms that some say they cause in children.
Trial Details and Jury Selection
Jury selection began this week and is expected to take at least a few days. Each day, 75 potential jurors will be questioned through at least Thursday. The trial itself is slated to last 6-8 weeks. The companies will argue before a jury for the first time in this litigation.
Snap Inc., the parent of Snapchat, settled the case last week for an undisclosed sum. The settlement removed Snap from the proceedings and left Meta, TikTok and YouTube as the remaining defendants.
Key Plaintiff and Allegations
KGM, a 19-year-old identified only by initials, claims that her early and continued use of social media addictively hooked her and worsened depression and suicidal thoughts. The lawsuit alleges that the platforms’ design choices were deliberate and aimed at maximizing youth engagement to drive advertising revenue.
The complaint cites the use of “behavioral and neurobiological techniques used by slot machines and exploited by the cigarette industry” as a strategy to create “harmful features that pushed them into self-destructive feedback loops.” It also argues that, if successful, the case could sidestep the companies’ First Amendment shield and Section 230 protection, which shields tech firms from liability for user-posted content.
Clay Calvert, a senior fellow of technology policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, noted that KGM and two other plaintiffs have been selected for bellwether trials-test cases that let both sides gauge arguments and potential damages before a jury.
Company Responses and Safeguards
Meta, YouTube and TikTok have not yet responded to comment requests. Meta has stated that it has added safeguards over the years and maintains that it is not liable for third-party content.
In a recent blog post, Meta explained that Instagram, Facebook and Messenger users under 16 will be placed into a teen account. The post cautioned that “clinicians and researchers find that mental health is a deeply complex and multifaceted issue,” and that “trends regarding teens’ well-being aren’t clear-cut or universal.” Meta argued that narrowing teen challenges to a single factor ignores scientific research and the many stressors impacting young people today.
Broader Legal Landscape
This trial is part of a growing wave of lawsuits aimed at holding social media companies accountable for harms to children. More than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, alleging that the company’s design choices on Instagram and Facebook contribute to the youth mental health crisis.
TikTok faces similar lawsuits in more than a dozen states. Additionally, a federal bellwether trial will begin in June in Oakland, California, representing school districts that have sued social media platforms over harms to children.
The outcome of the Los Angeles trial could set a legal precedent that influences how other cases are litigated and how platforms approach child safety and design.
What to Watch
- Jury selection pace: How quickly the jury is finalized may influence trial strategy.
- Testimony of executives: Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and other executives are expected to testify.
- Legal arguments on Section 230: The case’s focus on whether design choices can override Section 230 protection.
- Comparison to Big Tobacco trials: The lawsuit draws parallels to 1998 tobacco settlements, highlighting potential regulatory implications.
- Potential precedent: A verdict could affect future lawsuits against tech companies and shape platform policies.
Key Takeaways
The Los Angeles trial will test whether the design of popular social media platforms can be held responsible for harming children’s mental health. With jury selection underway and a trial set to last 6-8 weeks, the case will likely influence the legal and regulatory treatment of social media companies nationwide.
