A Los Angeles jury ruled Wednesday that Meta and Google-owned YouTube are liable for the effect that Instagram and YouTube had on a woman’s mental health struggles, a day after a New Mexico jury ruled against Meta in a similarly landmark social media case. Both could have major repercussions for the social media industry.
Kaley G.M, a 20-year-old California woman, alleged that Instagram and YouTube got her hooked on their products as a minor and caused mental health issues, including depressive episodes and suicidal thoughts. Kaley sued four social media companies in 2023, though she settled with TikTok and Snap, the parent company of Snapchat, in January for undisclosed terms.
This bellwether case is the first of a consolidated group of cases involving more than 1,600 plaintiffs.
The jury ordered the companies to pay the plaintiff $3 million in compensatory damages, with Meta responsible for 70% and YouTube 30%. The jury is separately weighing punitive damages.
“We disagree with the verdict and plan to appeal. This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site,” Google spokesperson Jose Castañeda said in a statement.
A Meta representative did not immediately respond for comment.
Several tech leaders testified at the trial, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Instagram chief Adam Mosseri and YouTube’s VP of Engineering Cristos Goodrow. The jurors heard arguments over whether Instagram and YouTube were deliberately designed to addict young users and cause mental harm.
Kaley’s attorney, Mark Lanier, said throughout the trial that she started accounts on YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at 9, with her use of Instagram climbing up to 16 hours a day. He used his closing arguments earlier this month to highlight internal Meta and Google documents that signaled the companies’ understanding of their platforms’ potential addictive nature, according to the Associated Press.
Meta has argued that Kaley’s mental health struggles were not caused by social media apps but by her difficult upbringing. YouTube has tried to exclude itself from the social-media characterization entirely, arguing it is more similar to television. Both companies said Kaley turned to the platforms to help cope with preexisting issues.
Tech companies have largely been shielded by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act when it comes to third-party content on their platforms. Kaley’s attorneys argued that Meta and YouTube are responsible for their design choices.
