SAMUEL BOIVIN / NurPhoto via AFP
An American jury ruled on Wednesday, March 25th, that Instagram and YouTube were responsible for the addictive nature of their media and the mental health issues experienced by a young Californian during adolescence. (Illustration photo)
Platforms accused of endangering a child. In a verdict that could mark a turning point for social networks, an American jury ruled on Wednesday, March 25th that Instagram and YouTube were responsible for the addictive nature of their media and the mental health issues experienced by a young Californian during adolescence.
Meta, the parent company of Instagram, and Google, owner of YouTube, immediately announced their intention to appeal the verdict. The plaintiff was awarded 6 million dollars, setting a precedent for thousands of similar complaints.
“The mental health of adolescents is profoundly complex and cannot be attributed to a single application,” said a Meta spokesperson. According to a Google spokesperson, “this case highlights a misunderstanding of YouTube, which is a streaming platform designed responsibly, not a social network.” Throughout the six weeks of the trial, YouTube presented itself as a new form of family television that had never led to addiction.
Plaintiff accuses them of “fueling” her depression
The jury initially awarded the plaintiff 3 million dollars in compensatory damages, holding Meta 70% responsible for her harm and YouTube 30%.
In a second phase, having concluded that both companies had acted fraudulently and deliberately, they added 3 million in punitive damages.
The two Silicon Valley giants faced Kaley G.M., a 20-year-old Californian who accused them of fueling her depression and suicidal thoughts during adolescence. She started watching YouTube videos at the age of 6 before becoming addicted to Instagram, where she secretly signed up at 9.
This verdict is the first in the United States in a series of lawsuits filed by thousands of families and about 800 school districts accusing social networks of contributing to a mental health epidemic in youth.
“Accountability”
TikTok and Snapchat, also involved in these lawsuits, chose to settle privately with Kaley G.M. to avoid this trial. Meta and YouTube, on the other hand, opted for a public trial.
After examining thousands of internal documents from the two giants during the trial, the jury concluded that both groups had shown neglect in the design of their social platforms and had not adequately warned users of the platform’s danger for minors. “The time for accountability has come,” said the plaintiff’s attorneys.
Lori Schott, whose daughter committed suicide during adolescence, broke down in tears upon hearing the verdict. “This judgment will make the world a safer place,” said the Colorado farmer to AFP.
Like her, many mothers of adolescents who took turns in the courtroom during the trial were dismayed by the platforms’ defense, which sought to show that Kaley G.M.’s problems were solely due to family violence.
Nocturnal notifications, filters, “likes”, etc.
For Meta, this unfavorable verdict comes after another historic ruling in New Mexico where it was found responsible for endangering children by exposing them to dangerous content, including sexual predators.
The Los Angeles trial will be followed by two similar cases, the next one starting in July. Nationally, another case combining thousands of similar complaints is under review before a federal judge in California.
All these proceedings do not focus on the content posted on the platforms, which are protected by American law, but on the design of social networks, accused of increasing features – such as “like” buttons, endless scrolling, nocturnal notifications, aesthetic filters, etc. – to retain users on the platform, especially minors.
The trial featured the in-person testimony of Mark Zuckerberg, which dominated discussions since the jury selection in late January, with many citizens showing hostility.
On the stand, the Meta CEO admitted that his group could have done more to prevent children under 13 from being on Instagram. However, “his testimony was not satisfactory, he changed his story, and we didn’t like it,” said one of the twelve jurors before leaving the court.
