A major trial over alleged social media addiction begins Tuesday in California. Senior executives from leading technology companies are expected to testify. The case could reshape legal responsibility for digital platforms.
The plaintiff is a 19-year-old woman identified as KGM. She says platform algorithms caused addiction and harmed her mental health. She argues the designs encouraged excessive use during her teenage years.
The defendants include Meta, owner of Instagram and Facebook, TikTok owner ByteDance, and YouTube parent Google. Snapchat settled with the plaintiff last week. The remaining companies will defend themselves in court.
The case will unfold at Los Angeles Superior Court. Legal observers describe it as the first of many similar lawsuits. These cases may undermine a long-standing legal shield for technology firms.
Courts examine how platforms shape behaviour
The companies argue the evidence does not prove responsibility for depression or eating disorders. They deny a direct connection between their products and the alleged harm.
The trial reflects a broader legal shift. Courts increasingly consider claims that digital products promote addictive behaviour. Pressure on the technology industry continues to intensify.
For years, companies relied on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Congress passed the law in 1996 to protect platforms from liability over user content.
This lawsuit targets different ground. It focuses on algorithms, notifications, and engagement tools. These features influence how users interact with social media apps.
KGM’s lawyer, Matthew Bergman, called the case a turning point. He said a jury will judge social media company conduct directly.
He said many young people worldwide face similar harm. He accused companies of placing profits above children’s wellbeing.
Industry faces growing legal exposure
Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University, warned of serious consequences. He said courtroom losses could threaten the companies’ future.
He also noted challenges for plaintiffs. Courts rarely link psychological harm directly to content publishers.
Still, he said the lawsuits opened new legal ground. Existing laws never anticipated claims focused on product design.
Evidence brings executives into focus
Jurors will hear extensive testimony during the trial. They will also review internal company documents.
Mary Graw Leary, a law professor at Catholic University of America, expects major revelations. She said companies may disclose information long hidden from the public.
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. They deny their designs directly injured young users.
Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg will testify early in the trial. His appearance stands as a highly anticipated moment.
In 2024, Zuckerberg told US senators scientific studies showed no proven causal link. He said research failed to connect social media to worse youth mental health.
During that hearing, he apologised to victims and their families. Lawmakers questioned him during emotional exchanges.
Global scrutiny of social media 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. Public testimony carries significant reputational risks.
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. They accused the company of misleading the public about platform risks.
Australia has banned social media use for children under 16. The UK signalled in January it may follow.
Franks said society has reached a tipping point. She argued governments no longer treat the technology industry with automatic deference.
