A closely watched trial over alleged social media addiction begins Tuesday in California. Senior executives from major technology companies are expected to testify. The case could reshape how courts define responsibility for digital platforms.
The plaintiff is a 19-year-old woman identified as KGM. She claims platform algorithms caused addiction and damaged her mental health. She says design choices encouraged compulsive use throughout her teenage years.
The defendants include Meta, owner of Instagram and Facebook, TikTok owner ByteDance, and YouTube parent Google. Snapchat reached a settlement with the plaintiff last week. The remaining companies will now defend themselves in court.
The case will proceed at Los Angeles Superior Court. Legal experts describe it as the first in a likely wave of similar lawsuits. These cases could weaken a long-standing legal defence used by technology firms.
Platform design moves to the heart of the case
The companies argue the evidence fails to prove responsibility for depression or eating disorders. They deny any direct link between their products and the alleged harms.
The decision to advance to trial reflects a broader legal shift. Courts increasingly examine claims that digital products promote addictive behaviour. Pressure on the technology industry continues to build.
For decades, companies relied on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Congress passed the law in 1996 to shield platforms from liability over user content.
This lawsuit targets different ground entirely. It focuses on algorithms, notifications, and engagement features. These tools shape how users interact with social media platforms.
KGM’s lawyer, Matthew Bergman, described the trial as a turning point. He said a jury will directly judge social media company conduct. He argued many young people worldwide suffer similar harm.
Legal risks escalate for tech companies
Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University, warned the stakes are enormous. He said courtroom losses could threaten the companies’ long-term survival.
He also highlighted obstacles for plaintiffs. Courts rarely connect psychological harm directly to content publishers. Still, he said these lawsuits opened new legal territory.
Internal documents and executives face scrutiny
Jurors will hear extensive testimony during the trial. They will also review internal company documents and communications.
Mary Graw Leary, a law professor at Catholic University of America, expects significant disclosures. She said companies may reveal information long hidden from public view.
Meta previously said it introduced dozens of safety tools for teenagers. Some researchers dispute the effectiveness of those measures. The companies plan to blame third-party users for any harm.
Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg is scheduled to testify early. His appearance stands as one of the most anticipated moments of the trial.
In 2024, Zuckerberg told US senators scientific studies showed no proven causal link. He said research failed to connect social media with worse youth mental health. He later apologised to victims and their families.
Global pressure on social media firms intensifies
Mary Anne Franks, a law professor at George Washington University, questioned executive testimony strategies. She said technology leaders often struggle under intense pressure. She added companies hoped to avoid placing top executives on the stand.
The trial arrives amid rising global scrutiny. Families, school districts, and prosecutors increasingly challenge social media practices. Last year, dozens of US states sued Meta over alleged public deception.
Australia has banned social media use for children under 16. The UK signalled in January it may adopt similar restrictions. Franks said governments no longer treat the technology industry with automatic deference.
