A prominent trial over alleged social media addiction starts Tuesday in California. Senior executives from major technology companies are expected to testify. The ruling could redefine legal responsibility for digital platforms.
The plaintiff is a 19-year-old woman identified as KGM. She claims platform algorithms caused addiction and harmed her mental health. She says design choices encouraged compulsive use during 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 now face trial.
The case will unfold at Los Angeles Superior Court. Legal observers describe it as the first of many similar lawsuits. These cases could weaken a long-standing legal defence used by technology firms.
Judges focus on algorithms and engagement tools
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 proceed to trial reflects a broader legal shift. Courts increasingly examine claims that digital products encourage addictive behaviour. Pressure on the technology sector continues to build.
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 a different issue 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 case as a legal turning point. He said a jury will directly judge social media company conduct. He added many young people worldwide face similar harm.
Technology firms face mounting legal risk
Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University, warned the stakes are high. He said losses in court could threaten the companies’ future.
He also highlighted difficulties for plaintiffs. Courts rarely connect psychological harm directly to content publishers. Still, he said the lawsuits opened new legal ground.
Internal documents bring 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 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 argue third-party users caused the alleged harm. They deny their designs directly injured young people.
Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg is scheduled to testify early. His appearance stands among the most anticipated moments.
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 scrutiny of social media companies 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 serious reputational risks.
The trial arrives as global scrutiny continues to rise. 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 adopt similar restrictions. Franks said governments no longer grant the technology industry automatic deference.
