A California jury delivered a landmark verdict on Wednesday, finding Meta and YouTube negligent for designing applications that allegedly harmed children. The decision follows a high-profile trial in the Los Angeles County Superior Court focused on the psychological impact of social media platforms.
The jury awarded $3 million in compensatory damages to the plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman identified as Kaley. The panel also determined that punitive damages are warranted, with a secondary phase scheduled to determine the final financial penalty.
The lawsuit alleged that Meta and YouTube intentionally engineered platforms to be addictive. Kaley testified that she began using social media as a child, claiming that features like auto-scrolling led to chronic anxiety, depression, and body image struggles.
Jurors assigned 70 percent of the liability to Meta, the parent company of Instagram, and 30 percent to YouTube, which is owned by Google. The verdict reflects a near-unanimous decision, with ten jurors favoring the plaintiff on all counts of negligence.
A spokesperson for Meta stated the company respectfully disagrees with the verdict and is evaluating legal options. Google spokesperson José Castañeda said YouTube plans to appeal, asserting that the case mischaracterizes the platform as a social media site rather than a streaming service.
The trial included testimony from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who discussed the challenges of enforcing age restrictions. Zuckerberg noted that while he wished the company had improved protections sooner, he believed current safeguards are in a better position.
This decision follows a separate $375 million penalty levied against Meta by a New Mexico jury yesterday. That case involved allegations of violating state protection laws and concealing information regarding child safety on its platforms.
As President Donald Trump continues to emphasize regulatory oversight of big tech, legal experts suggest this verdict may signal a shift in corporate accountability. The plaintiff's attorney called the decision a referendum on the entire social media industry.