A California jury has ruled that Meta and Google are responsible for designing social media platforms that foster addictive behavior, a landmark decision that could reshape how tech companies defend themselves against claims over online harm.
The case involved a 20-year-old woman known as Kaley, who told the court she became addicted to Meta’s Instagram and Google’s YouTube at a young age, resulting in significant mental health challenges. The jury found both companies negligent in the design of their apps and for failing to warn users of potential dangers. Meta was ordered to pay $4.2 million in damages, while Google faces $1.8 million. Both companies announced they would appeal the ruling.
Meta stated, “Teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app,” adding that the company remains confident in its efforts to protect young users. Google described YouTube as “a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site.” Snapchat and TikTok, also defendants in the case, settled before the trial began.
The ruling follows a similar decision in New Mexico, where Meta was found liable for misleading users on platform safety for children and ordered to pay $375 million. The verdicts come amid thousands of ongoing lawsuits in the United States claiming that social media designs have harmed the mental health of teenagers and young adults.
Experts say the California decision marks a shift in legal strategy, bypassing the longstanding protections of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields platforms from liability for user-generated content. By focusing on how apps were designed, plaintiffs successfully argued that the platforms themselves contributed to harm. Alex Cooney, CEO of Irish online safety charity CyberSafeKids, described the ruling as “a very clear signal that Section 230 is no longer the impenetrable legal protection Big Tech has relied upon.”
Human rights organizations have also welcomed the decision. Erika Guevara-Rosas, Amnesty International’s Senior Director of Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns, said social media companies have profited from features engineered to “hook” young users, including infinite scroll, autoplay, and persistent notifications. She urged platforms to undergo urgent redesigns to protect children and vulnerable users.
European regulators are also scrutinizing platform design rather than content. In February, the European Commission accused TikTok of creating an addictive user experience that could harm minors, highlighting infinite scroll, autoplay, and AI-driven recommendation systems. X’s Grok AI tool is under EU investigation for generating sexualized deepfake content, with authorities examining the design and risk assessments rather than individual posts.
Several countries are moving to restrict social media access for children. Austria announced plans to ban under-14s from platforms, joining France, Spain, Denmark, the UK, and Greece in introducing similar measures. Ireland is developing a “digital wallet” to verify age, while Australia introduced a social media ban for under-16s last year, though enforcement remains challenging due to tech-savvy workarounds.
Campaigners argue that instead of banning access, governments should target the platforms’ toxic algorithms and addictive design. Guevara-Rosas said, “States must require a fundamental overhaul of how these platforms operate. This is the only path to truly safe social media.”
The California verdict signals a potential turning point for online safety, suggesting that Big Tech may face growing legal and regulatory pressure to redesign platforms with the well-being of users at the forefront.
