Washington: Two of the world’s largest social media platforms are facing a jury trial over allegations that they intentionally designed their products to be addictive to young people — drawing comparisons to Big Tobacco’s reckoning with consumer addiction three decades ago.
The trial in Los Angeles, the first of its kind, centers on a 20-year-old woman who says her nonstop use for more than a decade of sites including Meta Platforms Inc.’s Instagram and Google’s YouTube caused her to suffer anxiety, depression and body dysmorphia. The companies are exposed to potentially billions of dollars in damages and the possibility that they could be forced to overhaul core features of their platforms.
Thousands of similar cases brought against the two companies as well as Snap Inc. and TikTok Inc. parent ByteDance Ltd. are pending in court. The Los Angeles trial is the first of several planned for this year.
The Los Angeles trial is over a complaint brought by a woman from Chico, California, who’s identified in filings as K.G.M. rather than her full name because she was still a minor when she sued. TikTok and Snap aren’t party to the Los Angeles trial because they reached confidential settlements with K.G.M.
More than 3,000 cases brought by children, adolescents and young adults — sometimes via their parents, siblings or other family members — based on claims of psychological distress, physical impairment and death have been filed across the US. Dozens of state attorneys general are also suing the companies. Additionally, public school districts have brought more than 1,200 complaints on behalf of students. The first trial among the school cases is scheduled to be held in Oakland, California in June.
The plaintiffs say that Meta, Google, TikTok and Snap design their services to hook children, an audience that academic and medical studies show is particularly vulnerable to addiction because their bodies and minds are still developing.
Who is testifying?
Instagram boss Adam Mosseri testified on Feb. 11 and Meta Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg is scheduled to testify on Feb. 18. YouTube head Neal Mohan is expected to testify later in the trial.
Jurors will also hear from dueling expert witnesses in child psychology and related research fields. K.G.M.’s lawyer said he plans to call his client as a witness toward the end of the trial, and possibly her mother and sister, too.
What’s the legal foundation?
The claims filed by individual users focus on product liability, similar to those that drove decades of litigation over cigarettes, asbestos, faulty medical devices and harmful prescription drugs, with mixed success. Rather than targeting the content that social media users see, the suits attack the platforms’ design and functionality, alleging that they are engineered to keep users constantly engaged.
The cases filed by the school districts claim the companies have created a “public nuisance” by distracting children and undermining their education and have caused a youth mental health crisis.
How does the alleged addiction happen?
Many of the lawsuits allege that the social media giants, borrowing behavioral techniques from the gambling and cigarette industries, design endless, algorithm-generated feeds to induce young users into a so-called flow state. In that state, users react to incessant notifications that manipulate dopamine levels, encourage repetitive account checking and reward round-the-clock use.
Addictive use of social media results in an array of psychological disorders, and in extreme cases self-harm and suicide, according to the lawsuits. Such addictive use delivers the most valuable prize: troves of data about young users’ preferences, habits and behaviors that are used to target them with ads.
How are internal records at the companies being used against them?
In 2021, Frances Haugen, a former product manager-turned-whistleblower at Facebook, revealed internal documents showing that Meta had long known that its platforms had ill effects on young people, especially girls struggling with their body image. Lawyers are also planning to show internal chats and emails from employees discussing the alleged addictive qualities of Meta’s products.
Records disclosed by ByteDance in response to lawsuits suggest that the company knew young people were more susceptible to being lured into trying dangerous and even deadly stunts they view on TikTok because their ability to judge risk isn’t fully formed. Product research at ByteDance concluded that the No. 1 reason identified by teens for participating in the challenges is “getting views/likes/comments,” followed by “impressing others online.”
What do the companies say?
They maintain that their products were not built to hook kids, and that they have settings and safeguards in place to protect young users. A lawyer for Meta argued at the start of K.G.M.’s trial that social media actually helps young people connect with friends and family. He also told jurors that K.G.M.’s medical records show that her psychological distress has other roots, including family turmoil, verbal and physical abuse and bullying at school.
In the past, the first line of defense for social media companies has been Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the 1996 federal statute that shields companies from liability over comments, ads, pictures and videos on their platforms. But both judges overseeing the current wave of lawsuits ruled that Section 230 doesn’t protect the companies from negligence claims.
What consequences could social media companies face?
The personal injury suits seek monetary compensation for the youths’ financial losses, including the costs of mental health treatment, as well as for pain and suffering. They also seek punitive damages against the companies to deter future misconduct, which will require demonstrating at trial that the companies showed willful and reckless disregard for user safety. If the companies lose the first trial — and continue to lose in other trials this year — pressure could mount for them to pursue settlements reaching tens or hundreds of billions of dollars, according to Bloomberg Intelligence.
The suits filed by the school districts seek to recover past and future costs tied to the alleged harms of social media, including funding to hire additional mental health counselors and security guards and additional training for teachers to help them identify and respond to students suffering distress.
The school districts are also demanding that the companies make adjustments to the platforms, including installing parental controls and tweaking algorithms that are designed to maximize user engagement. Similarly, the state attorneys general suing the companies are requesting court orders directing the platforms to dismantle what AGs describe as “addictive” design features that exploit children’s brain development for profit.
“Social-media companies likely can neither avoid paying hundreds of millions of dollars — and potentially far more — nor dodge changing practices,” Bloomberg Intelligence said.