Big Tech Hit: Meta, YouTube Ordered to Pay $6 Million Over Addiction Claims

In a first-of-its-kind decision, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and YouTube responsible for addicting and injuring a minor, ordering them to pay $6 million in damages. This landmark case is significant as it's the first of many alleging social media platforms endanger children through their design.

In a first-of-its-kind decision, a jury in Los Angeles found Meta and YouTube responsible in a case charging that their platforms were intentionally meant to addict and injure minors. The firms have been ordered to pay $6 million to a 20-year-old plaintiff named only by her initials, “KGM.” The plaintiff sued Meta's Instagram, ByteDance's TikTok, and Google's YouTube, alleging that she was wounded as a youngster as a result of the networks' addictive qualities. TikTok and Snap negotiated a deal before the trial began.

The jury ordered Meta to pay 70% of the $3 million in compensatory damages, while YouTube will cover the remaining amount. In addition, the plaintiff was granted additional $3 million in punitive damages.

How Did Firms React To Verdict?

In response to the judgement, a Meta spokeswoman informed Engadget that the firm disagrees with the finding and is considering legal alternatives. A Google spokeswoman said that the lawsuit misunderstands YouTube, which is a streaming platform rather than a social media site. Google intends to submit an appeal against the ruling.

Lawyers supporting the case said the verdict shows companies prioritised profits over children. They argued that social media platforms can cause personal harm, drawing comparisons with legal cases against tobacco companies in the past.

Why Is The Case So Important?

The case is significant because it is the first of numerous cases alleging that social media sites endanger kids due to their design. During the trial, Instagram CEO Adam Mosseri disputed the notion that individuals might be clinically addicted to social media sites. However, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg revealed that in the company's early years, he set goals to increase the amount of time youngsters spend on its platforms in order to boost revenue and user base.

During the trial, the plaintiff claimed she made YouTube and Instagram profiles when she was eight and nine years old, respectively. She claimed that she quickly started spending the majority of her time on Instagram. Her lawyer said that design features like "infinite scroll" were meant to keep users hooked on the apps.

This decision comes just after another legal defeat for the corporation. A New Mexico court recently ordered Meta to pay $375 million (£279 million) for misrepresenting customers about the safety of its services for youngsters. The jury determined that Meta's platforms threaten children by exposing them to sexually explicit content and allowing them to interact with sexual predators.