My TakeVerdict finds what any parent knows: social media is designed to be addictive
Jurors also decided Meta and YouTube either knew or should have known their products posed a danger to children and did not do enough to warn of the risks
Any parent with experience of children growing up in the social media age knows how addictive and potentially harmful the many hours they spend glued to their screens can be. We do not need a court to tell us.
But the verdict delivered by a jury in Los Angeles last week, the first of its kind, has finally given legal force to concerns that have been growing for years. The landmark case against Meta and YouTube, which is being compared to the groundbreaking settlement made by major US tobacco companies in the 1990s, has far-reaching implications.
It comes as governments around the world step up efforts to combat the dangers posed to children by their exposure to harmful online content and the impact of too much screen time. There has been a shift in perceptions.
The case in California was brought by a 20-year-old woman, referred to as Kaley, who was awarded US$6 million in damages for the mental health problems she suffered as a result of her excessive use of two popular platforms when a child.
Meta, which owns Instagram, was found by the jury to be 70 per cent liable and YouTube, owned by Google, 30 per cent responsible. TikTok and Snap settled on undisclosed terms before the trial.
Kaley said she was addicted to the platforms, starting with YouTube on her iPod touch from the age of six and Instagram at nine. She became depressed and began to self-harm by the time she was 10. At 13, Kaley was diagnosed with body dysmorphia and social phobia. She told the court social media use lowered her self-esteem, led her to give up her hobbies and have difficulty making friends.