Arguments are due to begin on Monday in a landmark US trial that could set a legal precedent on whether social media companies deliberately designed their platforms to make children addicted.
The case, being heard in Los Angeles Superior Court, is widely viewed as a bellwether, as its outcome could influence a surge of similar lawsuits across the United States.
The defendants are Alphabet and Meta, the technology companies behind YouTube and Instagram.
Meta co-founder and chief executive Mark Zuckerberg, along with senior executives from Instagram and YouTube, is expected to testify during the trial.
Social media companies face hundreds of lawsuits accusing them of encouraging addictive behaviour among young users, allegedly contributing to depression, eating disorders, psychiatric hospitalisation and, in some cases, suicide.
Lawyers representing the plaintiffs are drawing on legal strategies used against the tobacco industry in the 1990s and early 2000s, when companies were accused of knowingly selling harmful products.
On Friday, defence lawyers unsuccessfully sought to prevent comparisons between social media platforms and tobacco or other addictive products.
Profit versus child wellbeing
The trial, overseen by Judge Carolyn Kuhl, centres on claims that a 20-year-old woman, identified only by the initials K.G.M., suffered serious psychological harm after becoming addicted to social media as a child.
“This is the first time a social media company has ever faced a jury over harm caused to children,” said Matthew Bergman, founder of the Social Media Victims Law Centre, whose organisation is involved in more than 1,000 similar cases.
The centre focuses on holding social media firms legally accountable for alleged harm suffered by young users.
Technology companies argue that they are protected by Section 230 of the US Communications Decency Act, which generally shields platforms from liability for content posted by users.
However, the lawsuit contends that the companies should be held responsible for business models intentionally designed to maximise engagement and promote content that may damage users’ mental health.
“The allegations in these complaints are simply not true,” said Jose Castaneda, a spokesperson for YouTube.
“Providing young people with a safer, healthier experience has always been central to our work,” he added.
Meta has also denied the claims.
Snapchat and TikTok were initially named as defendants but reached undisclosed settlement agreements ahead of the trial.
Meanwhile, other lawsuits—including some brought by school districts—accusing social media companies of endangering young users are progressing through federal courts in Northern California and state courts nationwide.
A separate case accusing Meta of prioritising profit over the wellbeing of young users is also under way in New Mexico.
“Our investigation shows that Meta’s platforms are not safe spaces for children but instead environments where predators can exchange child abuse material and target minors,” New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez said in a statement.
Meta has rejected those allegations and said it will defend itself vigorously in court.
Jury selection in the Los Angeles case concluded on Friday, with Meta exercising challenges against several prospective jurors who expressed strong views about social media or Zuckerberg personally.
