Meta and Google accused of ‘creating a platform that harms young people’

In the March 25 ruling, Meta and Google had to pay $6 million in compensation to a young woman named KGM, or Kaley. Of which, Meta bears 70% and YouTube 30%, respectively 4.2 million and 1.8 million USD.

In mid-February, 20-year-old Kaley filed a lawsuit against Meta and Google. She attributes her addiction to apps like Instagram since age 9 and YouTube since age 6 to the “attention-grabbing design” of these platforms, such as the “infinite scroll” feature that encourages users to keep looking at new posts. She said she suffered from severe body image disorders, depression and suicidal thoughts due to using the app “almost constantly”, while the notifications appeared so much that it was “hard for her to stop using it”.

According to Kaley’s attorney, the two companies intentionally targeted children and made decisions that put profits above safety. This person also emphasized that exposure to platforms like Instagram and YouTube as a child was the cause of Kaley’s mental health problems.

Jurors said they had seen internal documents revealing how Meta and Google sought to attract young users, as well as questioning Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. When asked about his plan to remove beauty filters that could harm teenage girls, Zuckerberg refused on the grounds that users are free to express themselves.

“I feel the evidence is not clear enough to support restricting people’s freedom of speech,” he said in court.

The court concluded that Google and Meta were negligent in designing the two applications and failed to warn about their dangers to minors. “Today’s verdict should serve as a referendum, from the jury to the entire industry, that accountability has been served,” said the attorney representing Kaley.

Meanwhile, Meta and Google representatives said the company will appeal.

Theo Reutersthe ruling could set a precedent for thousands of similar lawsuits that may occur in the future in the US. CNBC called it “the social media industry’s tobacco lawsuit,” comparing it to tobacco companies in the 1990s that were forced to pay billions of dollars for lying to the public about the safety and potential harm of their products.

Gil Luria, technology analyst at investment firm DA Davidson, assessed the ruling as a “setback” for Meta and Google. “The process will likely drag on through lawsuits and appeals in the near future. But in the end, it could force companies to introduce consumer protection measures, slowing growth,” Luria said.

Snap and TikTok are also defendants in the lawsuit. However, the two reached an agreement with the plaintiff before the trial began. Terms of the agreement were not disclosed.

Previously, on March 24, Meta was also ruled by the New Mexico state court for intentionally violating regulations and failing to control platforms against online predators targeting children. Mark Zuckerberg’s company was forced to pay $375 million in compensation based on the number of violations.

Statistics of Reuters shows there are currently more than 2,400 lawsuits against Meta and other social media companies with similar allegations concentrated in California federal court.