Multiple social media platforms face a first-of-its-kind trial in a Los Angeles court this week, facing accusations that their platforms are designed to be harmfully addictive.
The landmark case centers on claims from a 19-year-old, identified only as K.G.M. in the lawsuit, who claims she became addicted to the social media platforms, which eventually led her to have depression and suicidal thoughts. Meta, owner of Instagram and Facebook; Snap, owners of Snapchat; TikTok, and YouTube were initially slated to be on trial, but settlements with Snap and TikTok were announced for undisclosed amounts just before trial, leaving only Meta and YouTube up for potential damages in this case.
Social media platforms and their addictive qualities have been increasingly under the microscope for the past decade, with the heads of social media companies testifying before Congress and platforms making adjustments for younger users. In June 2024, then-President Joe Biden’s Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, called for a social media warning label to state that “social media is associated with significant mental health harms for adolescents.”
The lawsuit in the Superior Court of California for Los Angeles County comes nearly four years after the claims were initially filed, and after Judge Carolyn Kuhl denied the social media companies’ bids to summarily dismiss the claims in November.
Both YouTube and Meta have strongly denied the claims that their platforms are designed to be addictive. The companies have also argued that Section 230, a federal statute that generally protects online platforms from liability for user-posted content, shields them from the claims brought by K.G.M.
The claims of immunity under Section 230 have not been enough to shield the social media platforms so far, while lawyers supporting K.G.M. have claimed the statute has been abused by social media companies looking to avoid liability.
“Section 230 has been liberally construed far beyond its language or intent, and until recently had been seen as a veritable carte blanche for social media companies to operate with complete immunity,” Matthew P. Bergman, founding attorney at the Social Media Victims Law Center, said about the lawsuit.
The arguments pushed by K.G.M.’s lawyers in the lawsuit are that the platforms themselves were designed to be addictive, pointing to features such as infinite scroll and autoplay.
The case in Los Angeles is widely viewed as a sign of where future lawsuits over social media addiction could go across the country. Lawyers for the teenage plaintiff compared the case to the high-profile lawsuits against tobacco companies in the 1990s over their advertising, particularly to young people, which led to significant restrictions on how those products may be marketed.
FEDERAL JUDGE SKEPTICAL OF MINNESOTA’S PLEA FOR COURT TO END SWEEPING DHS OPERATION
“Borrowing heavily from the behavioral and neurobiological techniques used by slot machines and exploited by the cigarette industry, Defendants deliberately embedded in their products an array of design features aimed at maximizing youth engagement to drive advertising revenue,” the lawsuit said, per the Associated Press.
Jury selection in the social media addiction trial comes less than a week after the Iowa Supreme Court allowed a lawsuit, filed by the state’s attorney general, to proceed against TikTok. That lawsuit alleges the social media platform misrepresented the amount of inappropriate videos it showed children, in violation of the state’s Consumer Fraud Act.