Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta and Google’s YouTube are defending themselves in a Los Angeles courtroom against accusations that they intentionally designed their platforms to addict young users, as opening statements began Monday in a landmark trial that could reshape how social media companies operate.
CBS News reports that the trial, which commenced in Los Angeles County Superior Court, represents one of several major legal challenges confronting the world’s largest social media companies this year. The plaintiffs allege that Instagram’s parent company Meta and Google’s YouTube deliberately created addictive features that harm children who use their services. TikTok and Snap, originally named as defendants in the lawsuit, have settled for undisclosed amounts.
Attorney Mark Lanier, representing the plaintiffs, delivered an opening statement characterizing the case as straightforward, describing it as easy as ABC, which he explained stands for “addicting the brains of children.” He described Meta and Google as two of the richest corporations in history that have engineered addiction in children’s brains.
The presentation included numerous internal emails, documents, and studies from Meta, YouTube, and Google. Lanier highlighted findings from a Meta research initiative called Project Myst, which surveyed 1,000 teenagers and their parents about social media usage. According to Lanier, the study revealed two significant findings: the company understood that children experiencing adverse events such as trauma and stress were especially susceptible to addiction, and parental supervision and controls had minimal effectiveness.
Internal company communications presented to the jury included Google documents comparing YouTube to a casino, and Meta employee exchanges where one individual characterized Instagram as being like a drug, with employees essentially functioning as pushers.
The case centers on a 20-year-old plaintiff identified only as KGM, whose lawsuit could influence thousands of similar cases against social media companies. She and two other plaintiffs have been selected for bellwether trials, which serve as test cases allowing both sides to evaluate how their arguments perform before a jury.
KGM made a brief courtroom appearance during Lanier’s presentation and is scheduled to testify later in the proceedings. Lanier discussed her childhood, emphasizing her personality before she began using social media. According to Lanier, her mother called her a creative spark as a child. She began using YouTube at age six and Instagram at age nine, and before completing elementary school had posted 284 videos on YouTube.
The trial’s outcome could significantly impact the companies’ business practices and their approach to underage users. Lanier predicted that defense attorneys would try to blame the little girl and her parents for the trap they built, referring to the plaintiff who was a minor when she allegedly became addicted to the platforms, which she claims negatively affected her mental health.
Despite Meta and YouTube’s public statements about protecting children and implementing safeguards, Lanier argued their internal documents reveal a contrasting position, with explicit references identifying young children as target audiences.
Lanier drew parallels between social media companies and tobacco firms, citing internal Meta communications from employees concerned about the company’s lack of proactive measures regarding potential harms to children and teenagers.
Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl instructed jurors that they are not required to stop using Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, or other social media platforms during the trial, which is expected to last approximately eight weeks. However, she emphasized they should not alter their interaction patterns with these platforms, including changing settings or creating new accounts. Kuhl also directed jurors to independently assess the liability of Meta and YouTube during deliberations.
KGM alleges that her early social media use addicted her to the technology and worsened depression and suicidal thoughts. Crucially, the lawsuit claims this resulted from deliberate design choices by companies seeking to make their platforms more addictive to children for profit. If successful, this argument could bypass the companies’ First Amendment protections and Section 230, which shields tech companies from liability for content posted on their platforms.
The lawsuit states: “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 technology companies dispute claims that their products deliberately harm children, pointing to numerous safeguards added over the years and arguing they are not liable for third-party content posted on their sites.
A Meta spokesperson told Breitbart News:
We strongly disagree with these allegations and are confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people. For over a decade, we’ve listened to parents, worked with experts and law enforcement, and conducted in-depth research to understand the issues that matter most. We use these insights to make meaningful changes—like introducing Teen Accounts with built-in protections and providing parents with tools to manage their teens’ experiences. We’re proud of the progress we’ve made, and we’re always working to do better.
Read more at CBS News here.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship.
Read the full article here
