A Los Angeles jury has found that Meta and Google built addictive online platforms that harmed a young user, awarding $6 million to a woman who said she became hooked on YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 9 and later experienced depression, anxiety and body dysmorphia.
The verdict came Wednesday in Los Angeles Superior Court after nearly nine days of deliberations by a 12-person jury following a five-week trial. Jurors concluded that Meta, the parent company of Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp, and Google, which owns YouTube, were negligent and failed to provide adequate warnings about dangers connected to their platforms. Jurors also determined the companies acted with “malice, oppression, or fraud.”
The woman who brought the lawsuit is now 20 years old and appeared in court using the name Kaley and the initials KGM. The jury awarded $3 million in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages. Under the ruling, Meta must pay 70% of the damages and Google must pay the remaining 30%.
Jurors heard testimony from Meta and YouTube executives, whistleblowers, expert witnesses on social media and addiction, therapists and the plaintiff during the trial. The panel of five men and seven women returned a 10-2 vote in favor of the plaintiff on every question presented to them.
The case centered on how social media platforms were built. Lawyers representing Kaley argued that Instagram and YouTube included features intended to keep users on the platforms for long periods. They pointed to features such as infinite scroll, autoplaying videos, notifications and beauty filters.
Lead trial lawyer Mark Lanier described the apps during closing arguments. “How do you make a child never put down the phone? That’s called the engineering of addiction. They engineered it, they put these features on the phones,” he told the jury. Lanier also described the platforms as “Trojan horses,” telling jurors: “These are Trojan horses: they look wonderful and great … but you invite them in and they take over.”
Lanier later addressed punitive damages using a jar filled with M&Ms. He told the jury that each candy represented $1 billion of company value. “You’ve got to talk to Meta in Meta money,” he said.
Kaley testified that she began using YouTube when she was 6 years old and Instagram when she was 9. Another description of the trial stated she began using Instagram at age 11. She told jurors she encountered no attempts to block her from using the platforms even though Meta’s rules require users to be at least 13 years old.
She told jurors that social media use increased over time. “I stopped engaging with family because I was spending all my time on social media,” she said.
Evidence presented during the trial showed that her longest single day using Instagram lasted 16 hours. When asked about that figure, Instagram head Adam Mosseri said spending most of the day on the platform was “problematic,” but he did not describe it as addiction.
Kaley testified that when she was 10 years old, she began experiencing anxiety and depression. She also said she began engaging in self-harm. Years later, a therapist diagnosed her with anxiety and depression.
She also testified that when she was 13, a therapist diagnosed her with body dysmorphic disorder and social phobia. Body dysmorphia is a condition that causes people to worry excessively about their physical appearance.
Kaley told jurors that social media contributed to her focus on physical appearance. She said she used Instagram beauty filters that changed the way she looked by making her nose smaller and her eyes bigger.
She testified that she frequently checked social media for validation and sometimes left class to check the number of “likes” on her posts. She said concentrating at school became difficult because she wanted to remain on social media.
The trial included testimony from Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg, who appeared before the jury in February. During questioning, he referred to the company policy prohibiting users under 13 from using its platforms.
When presented with internal research showing younger children were using the apps, Zuckerberg said he “always wished” progress in identifying underage users had occurred faster. He also said the company had reached the “right place over time.”
Lawyers representing Kaley introduced internal company documents during the trial. One document stated: “If we wanna win big with teens, we must bring them in as tweens.” Another internal memo said 11-year-olds were four times as likely to return to Instagram compared with competing apps.
Lanier also presented a 35-foot collage of selfies Kaley had posted on Instagram. Many of the photos included beauty filters. The display was presented during questioning of Zuckerberg about how a user younger than 13 had posted extensively on the platform.
Meta and Google said they disagreed with the verdict and plan to appeal.
Meta said in a statement: “Teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app. We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously as every case is different, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online.”
Google spokesperson José Castañeda said: “This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site.”
During the trial, lawyers for the companies argued that Kaley’s mental health issues had multiple causes. They pointed to medical records indicating emotional and physical abuse at home. Lawyers for the companies also said Kaley’s therapist never documented social media use as a factor in her mental health problems.
The lawsuit belongs to consolidated California cases claiming social media companies harmed young users. The litigation includes more than 1,600 plaintiffs, including over 350 families and 250 school districts.
Kaley’s case is the first of more than 20 bellwether trials scheduled over the next several years. Bellwether trials test how juries respond to legal arguments before additional cases move forward. The next bellwether case is scheduled to go to trial in July.
Another series of federal lawsuits involving hundreds of plaintiffs is scheduled to begin trial in San Francisco in June. Another case against Meta and other social media companies involving claims of harm to children is also scheduled to begin in June in a California federal court.
TikTok and Snap were originally named as defendants in Kaley’s lawsuit, but both companies reached undisclosed settlements with her before the trial began.
The verdict in Los Angeles came one day after a separate jury in New Mexico ordered Meta to pay $375 million in civil penalties in a lawsuit involving harm to young users. In that case, the jury found Meta misled consumers about the safety of its platforms and enabled harm, including child sexual exploitation.
The New Mexico trial will move into a second phase in May when a judge will decide whether Meta created a public nuisance and whether the company must pay additional penalties.
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez said he will ask the court to require Meta to change its apps to improve safety. He said in a statement: “Juries in New Mexico and California have recognized that Meta’s public deception and design features are putting children in harm’s way.”
Parents and campaign groups followed the Los Angeles trial closely. Parents of other children who say they were harmed by social media gathered outside the courthouse throughout the proceedings. When the verdict was announced, supporters, including Amy Neville, were seen hugging and celebrating.
Ellen Roome, who is suing TikTok following the death of her son, spoke about the verdict during an interview with BBC Breakfast. “How many more children are going to be harmed and potentially die from these platforms?” she asked. “It’s been proved it’s not safe – and social media companies need to fix it.”
British online safety campaigner Ian Russell, whose 14-year-old daughter Molly died in 2017 after consuming harmful content online, spoke about the ruling during an appearance on the BBC’s Newsnight programme. “There is a big hope that this is a big moment and tech will… [need] to change, but only if the governments do something about it,” he said.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have campaigned on social media harms, described the verdict as “a reckoning.” They said: “Let this be the change – where our children’s safety is finally prioritised above profit.”
The decision comes as lawmakers and governments examine limits on youth access to social media. Australia has introduced restrictions intended to limit children’s use of social media platforms. The United Kingdom is running a pilot programme to examine how a ban on social media for people under 16 could work.
British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer addressed the issue after the verdict and referred to a government consultation examining whether social media should be banned for users under 16.
“It’s not if things are going to change, things are going to change,” Starmer said. “The question is, how much and what are we going to do?”
Two jurors later spoke briefly with reporters outside the courtroom. The jury foreman, who gave only his first name Matthew, said jurors focused on the law during deliberations. “We stuck to following the law and how it was presented to us.”
Another juror, Victoria, said the panel wanted the companies to understand the verdict. “We wanted them to feel it,” she said. “We wanted them to realize this was unacceptable.”
After the damages amount was announced, Lanier spoke with reporters outside the courthouse. “I would’ve thought it was likely we would have gotten a bigger number,” he said. “I trust the system and trust people to assess what’s right and best.”
Joseph VanZandt, the co-lead lawyer representing families and others suing social media companies, said in a statement after the verdict: “Today’s verdict is a referendum — from a jury, to an entire industry — that accountability has arrived.”
