Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg took the stand on Wednesday before a Los Angeles jury in a landmark trial that could reshape the relationship between social media companies and young users across the United States. The case, brought by a 20-year-old woman identified as Kaley and her mother Karen Glenn, is the first of more than 1,500 similar lawsuits to reach trial, making it a bellwether case whose outcome could determine how thousands of other claims against technology giants play out in courtrooms across the country.
The lawsuit alleges that platforms such as Instagram and Facebook are defective products deliberately engineered to exploit vulnerabilities in developing brains. Kaley's attorney, Mark Lanier, told the jury that his client began using YouTube at the age of six and Instagram at nine, eventually spending several hours a day on the platform and on one occasion remaining connected for more than 16 hours straight. Lanier described the apps as digital casinos designed to hook children, stating that these companies built machines designed to addict the brains of children through features such as infinite scroll, auto-play videos, likes, beauty filters and push notifications.
The plaintiff claims that her prolonged exposure to these platforms led to anxiety, body dysmorphia and suicidal thoughts, and that she experienced cyberbullying and sextortion on Instagram during her teenage years. Internal company documents presented as evidence during the trial reportedly show that executives were aware of the harmful effects their products had on young users but prioritized engagement and growth over safety. The revelations echo findings from whistleblower Frances Haugen, who in 2021 leaked thousands of internal documents showing that the company knew Instagram was toxic for a significant percentage of teenage girls.
Attorneys representing the technology companies countered that a child experiencing mental health difficulties after using a platform does not prove that social media caused those problems. The defense argued that the industry has become a convenient scapegoat for the complex emotional and psychological challenges that young people face, which can stem from many different sources including family dynamics, school pressures and genetic predispositions. They maintained that social media also provides significant benefits to young users, including community building, creative expression and access to educational resources.
The trial, which is being heard in a Los Angeles state court, requires nine out of 12 jurors to reach agreement for a verdict in either direction. Legal experts say a ruling in favor of the family could trigger a wave of similar successful claims and potentially force sweeping changes to how social media platforms operate, particularly regarding features aimed at younger audiences. The case has drawn attention from lawmakers, child safety advocates and parents groups who have long argued that technology companies have not done enough to protect minors from addictive design patterns.
Zuckerberg's testimony marks the highest-profile moment of the trial so far and is expected to focus on what he personally knew about the impact of his platforms on children's mental health and what steps the company took or failed to take in response. The outcome carries enormous financial and regulatory implications for an industry that has largely operated without specific design-safety obligations toward minors. Observers note that regardless of the verdict, the trial has already succeeded in placing the question of social media's impact on youth mental health at the center of the national conversation.
Comments