The world’s largest social media companies have been accused of creating “addiction machines” as a landmark trial began in California examining the mental health effects of Instagram and YouTube.

In his opening argument before Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl and a jury, Mark Lanier argued that his client, plaintiff “K.G.M.,” suffered from mental health issues as a result of her social media addiction.

“These companies built machines designed to addict the brains of children, and they did it on purpose,” Lanier said.

Lawyers for Meta and YouTube told the jury that K.G.M.’s addiction stemmed from other issues in her life, not their negligence.

K.G.M. will be referred to by her initials, or as Kaley G.M., because the alleged harms took place when she was a minor.

Lanier also charged that Meta and YouTube failed to warn of the dangers to young users posed by the design of their platforms.

Lanier underscored his opening remarks by speaking with a display of children’s blocks in front of him: the words “Addicting,” “Brains” and “Children” appeared next to the letters A, B, and C.

“This case is about two of the richest corporations in history who have engineered addiction in children’s brains,” Lanier said. “I’m going to show you the addiction machine that they built, the internal documents that people normally don’t get to see, and emails from [Meta CEO] Mark Zuckerberg and YouTube executives.”

In a selected portion of a 2015 email Lanier showed the court, Zuckerberg demanded that “time spent increases by 12%” on Meta platforms in order to meet internal business goals.

As for YouTube, Lanier said the platform, owned by Google, intentionally targeted young users because it could “charge advertisers more”, as compared to its YouTube Kids platform.

Lanier then accused YouTube of trying to take advantage of busy parents looking for a “digital babysitting service.”

When it was Meta’s turn to make an opening statement, attorney Paul Schmidt pointed the jury to the question of whether Instagram was a substantial factor in K.G.M’s mental health struggles.

He portrayed K.G.M as someone dealing with family turmoil, including neglect, physical and verbal abuse, and bullying by her parents.

Schmidt told the jury he admired K.G.M because she “worked hard to overcome” her struggles. He referenced records that described domestic violence in K.G.M’s family history and seeing therapists starting when she was three years old.

On a projector, Schmidt showed certain statements K.G.M made about her home life, including that her mother had screamed at her, called her stupid, and had made her want to kill herself.

“I recognise those are tough quotes,” Schmidt told the jury. “In a case that’s about psychological distress, that is what you have to consider.”

The proceedings on Monday marked the first day in what is poised to be a six-week trial with significant implications for similar lawsuits around the country likely to go to trial this year.

The Los Angeles trial will test legal arguments set forth by families claiming to have seen their children suffer due to their use of social media and the platforms which reject liability for how their platforms are used by people.

Over the course of the next several weeks, there will be testimony from experts, family members of children who died, and by Zuckerberg, Adam Mosseri, the head of Instagram, and Neal Mohan, the CEO of YouTube.

Jurors are also expected to hear from former Meta employees who quit and became whistleblowers regarding the issue of social media addiction among children.

The outcome of the trial may provide a benchmark for monetary damages that would likely impact thousands of cases brought by other plaintiffs, their families, state prosecutors, and school districts across the United States.

In one such case, brought by 29 state Attorneys General, prosecutors have just insisted that a California Federal judge require Meta to significantly alter or disable aspects of its business and platforms.

In a Monday filing, all of the state attorneys collectively requested an injunction that would force Meta to: remove all accounts known to belong to users under 13 years of age; to delete information the company has collected through Facebook and Instagram on users under the age of 13; and to delete algorithms and generative artificial intelligence tools using such data.

A group of 18 of the state attorneys who are pursuing state-specific consumer protection claims against Meta also requested that the court force the company to: implement time restrictions for young users that would prohibit school-time and night-time use; deactivate “addictive” design features like infinite scroll and autoplay; and disable filters that enhance photos or perceptions of beauty.

Meta over the last two years has rolled out certain features for “teen accounts” on Instagram, including content filtering for users under 16 years of age.

The state attorneys argued in the Monday filing that this work from Meta was little more than “a public relations measure offering minimal real protections for teen users on the platforms”.

Monday’s proceedings in Los Angeles took place as about one hundred people watched from the gallery, including parents who believe their children died as a result of choices the companies made about how to design their algorithms, notifications and other features.

The companies also maintain they are not responsible for content that third parties post under federal law.

Snapchat-parent Snap and TikTok both settled with K.G.M. last month and are no longer defendants in the case.

Source: BBC

--Agencies