Instagram and YouTube were designed to be addictive to young users without concern for their well-being.
This is what seven men and five women decided yesterday during a highly-watched jury trial in the US that could shape the future of social media.
Metro has spoken with mental health and legal experts to find out what this ruling means and whether a verdict like this could be seen in the UK.
What have Google and Meta been accused of?
In short, it was deciding whether social media was built to be addictive, like cigarettes or casino slot machines.
The case was lodged against Meta, the company behind Facebook and Instagram, and YouTube-owner Google.
Plaintiff KGM, a 20-year-old woman from California, created a YouTube channel when she was eight and a Facebook account a year later.
In her suit, KGM, also named as Kaley, claimed she became addicted to the sites as a child and suffered anxiety, depression and body-image issues.
The lawsuit argued that common functions such as infinite scrolling, algorithmic recommendations, pinging notifications and automatically playing videos lead to compulsive use.
Laura Gwilt, a child and adolescent therapist at Swift Psychology, told Metro that social media is a lot more than sliding into people’s DMs.
‘Many platforms use features that are specifically built to keep users engaged for as long as possible,’ she says, comparing pulling down to refresh like pulling the lever of a slot machine.
‘Research shows that these features rely on what psychologists call intermittent rewards. You do not get something interesting every time, but you get it often enough to keep going.’
What constitutes 'social media'?
This is a question that Australia, first in the world to ban social media for under-16s, has attempted to answer.
The platforms affected by the law are Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Reddit, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X and YouTube.
You might notice that services like WhatsApp, Messenger, Discord and Roblox didn’t make the cut.
This is because e-safety officials consider them primarily for messaging or gaming, while social media is more about sharing content.
What does the ruling mean going forward?
The immediate outcome of the trial was two fines – Meta must pay $4.2 million and YouTube must pay $1.8 million.
While the thought that social media is addictive is nothing new, this is the first time it was tested in a court, which lawyers call a ‘bellwether trial’.
It came just days after a ruling in New Mexico that found Meta liable for violating state law by failing to safeguard users from child predators.
Meta told Metro the company will appeal both the New Mexico and California verdicts, one it ‘respectfully disagrees’ with.
‘Teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app,’ a spokesperson said.
Google also plans to appeal the case, a spokesperson told Metro, adding: ‘This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site’
But KGM’s case is one of thousands of lawsuits filed by teens, school leaders and state attorneys general against Meta, YouTube, TikTok and Snapchat.
This ruling, that a social media site can cause personal injury, will likely be a factor in these future cases.
Will social media be banned in the UK?
That’s the big question. The UK is already considering an Australia-style social media ban, while Malaysia’s legal ban started in January.
It’s hard to say if it’ll pave the way for bans, but experts say it could be used by governments as a reason to implement them.
Mark Jones, a partner at the London law firm Payne Hicks Beach and an expert in online safety, doubts a ban will ever be implemented in the US.
He tells Metro that the US government already feels the UK’s Online Safety Act, which stops under-18s from using social media, is ‘over-reaching’.
‘Trump and others want “free speech” not regulation,’ he adds.
Could a similar lawsuit happen in the UK?
Legal experts aren’t sure. Iona Silverman, intellectual property and a media partner at Freeths LLP, feels the case challenges the ‘protection’ social media has long enjoyed.
‘While I don’t expect to see a similar class action in the UK, this most recent decision will put increased pressure on the government to ensure the Online Safety Act is enforced and to implement further measures to ensure the safety of young people online,’ Silverman added.
Jones similarly said the California case could prompt the UK to re-examine how it regulates big tech.
‘It has been a bad week for Meta,’ he says.
Do you support a UK social media ban?
-
Yes.
-
No.
-
It's a complex issue and depends on specific cases.
‘My concern is that the UK approach could be yet another consultation. By the time that consultation ends and recommendations are made, the tech world will have moved on and we will always be playing catch-up with tech.
‘We need robust action to be taken.’
The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology told Metro that the ruling ‘is a matter for the US courts’.
‘However, we remain completely committed to giving children here in the UK the enriching childhoods they deserve.’
A spokesperson added that the department launched a consultation on how, if at all, social media should be restricted in the UK for child safety.
‘When it comes to children’s safety, nothing is off the table and we will set out our plans in the summer,’ they said.
Google has been approached for comment.
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
