A hammer judgment with consequences: Social media classified as an addictive factor

If each piece of chocolate were worth a billion dollars, the glass would represent the combined market value of the social media companies Meta and Youtube. According to Lanier, compensation in the millions is meaningless for these companies.

According to US media reports, there was already a mood in the trial room Supreme Court of California felt, which was reflected in a potentially groundbreaking verdict on Thursday: Ten of the twelve jurors saw it as proven that YouTube and Meta (Facebook, Instagram) consciously design their platforms in such a way that that they make users addicted and promote psychological problems.

Protocols prove: Managers know

The lawsuit was filed by a 20-year-old who is only referred to in the media by her initials “KGM”. She blames her psychological problems on her intensive social media consumption as a teenager and was downright addictive – because the algorithms were specifically designed that way. The jury awarded her a total of $6 million in damages.

Originally, KGM was also against the platforms that were particularly popular with young people Tiktok and Snapchat Lawsuit filed. However, these two companies had already dealt with her before the trial began Compensation payments agreed. The Instagram parent company Meta and YouTube, which belongs to the Google empire, confidently went to court – their lawyers explained in advance that it could not be proven that social media was addictive.

But on the first day of the trial, KGM lawyer Lanier presented internal Protocols from Meta and YouTube, which prove that managers knew about the negative effects of their products and discussed them in meetings. Nevertheless, both platforms continually developed new functions that are intended to encourage longer use, such as automatically playing videos or algorithmic recommendations for new content.

Later even meta founders said Mark Zuckerberg and its Instagram managing director Adam Mosseri Both pointed out that Meta was already making “changes to protect young users”.

Social media bans are being considered in many countries

However, the group is currently under massive political pressure. Australia became the first country to introduce a social media ban for under-16s in December. The basis for this is a study commissioned by the government, according to which 70 percent of teenagers were exposed to inappropriate content on social networks.

Many other countries are currently considering similar measures – Austria’s federal government wants to present a draft law banning social media for young people this Friday.

Just on Tuesday, Meta was sentenced in another trial in New Mexico to a fine of $375 million because the company did not adequately protect its users from child abuse.

Despite the smaller sum, the consequences of this ruling are potentially more serious and more expensive in the long term: According to lawyer Lanier, there are still “thousands of other plaintiffs” waiting to file. The KGM case could have an impact on the verdict of these follow-up trials because of the US judicial system’s focus on precedent.

Both companies appealed the verdict. Metas says they “disagree” and that YouTube sees itself as fundamentally misunderstood: “YouTube is a video streaming platform, not a social network.” Until a possible appeal process, eight more lawsuits from individuals against both companies are to be dealt with in California – possibly with consequences.