Meta has confirmed it will appeal a major US court verdict after a jury found both it and Google liable for designing “addictive” social media platforms that caused significant harm to a young user.
It’s a decision that could prove a precedent for similar lawsuits, with the ruling already being viewed as a turning point in how courts hold tech giants accountable for user wellbeing.
A Los Angeles jury awarded damages to 20-year-old Californian Kaley G.M., who alleged the “addictive design” of Instagram and YouTube drove compulsive use from a young age, ultimately contributing to serious mental health impacts. The “addictive” elements in question included infinite scrolling, autoplay and algorithm-driven recommendations
Kaley told the court she began using YouTube at age six and Instagram at age nine, eventually spending up to 16 hours a day on the platforms. She described becoming addicted to using them “all day long,” with her usage significantly worsening her mental health.
According to the case, this prolonged exposure contributed to severe depression, anxiety, body dysmorphia and suicidal thoughts.
After nine days of deliberations, the jury found the parent companies of Instagram and YouTube — Meta and Google — negligent in both the design and operation of their platforms.
The California courts set the case as a bellwether, meaning the guilty verdict could help decide what will happen in more than 1,600 other related cases. In those, plaintiffs similarly allege social media giants including Meta, Google, TikTok and Snapchat caused or worsened mental health issues in teens.
Jurors determined the companies knew, or should have known, that their services posed a danger to minors, failed to provide adequate warnings about those risks, and did not take reasonable steps to prevent harm.
The jury also found that this negligence was a substantial factor in causing harm to the plaintiff, ultimately awarding her $US3 million ($A4.5 million) in damages.
Meta, which owns Instagram alongside Facebook and WhatsApp, told B&T it would challenge the decision.
“We respectfully disagree with the verdict and will appeal. Teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app. We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously as every case is different, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online,” a Meta spokesperson said.
Shai Luft, COO and co-founder of Bench Media, told B&T the ruling should serve as a wake-up call for marketers heavily reliant on major platforms.
“The ruling against Meta and Google should land squarely on the desks of CMOs,” he said. “For years, advertisers have built growth strategies heavily reliant on these platforms, drawn to their scale, targeting and performance. But this decision exposes the broader reality: those results are often driven by product design choices now under legal and ethical scrutiny.
“That reliance now looks like a concentration risk. If regulation tightens or user behaviour shifts, many brands will find themselves overexposed.
“The smarter move from here is diversification, not just for performance, but for resilience.”
The verdict also comes as Meta faces seperate legal pressure in a separate lawsuit brought by New Mexico Attorney General, which accused the company of misleading users about the safety of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, and of enabling child sexual exploitation on its platforms.
After deliberating for less than a day, the jury found Meta breached New Mexico’s consumer protection law and ordered the company to pay $US375 million ($A538 million) in civil penalties.
B&T has contacted Google, owner of YouTube, for comment.
