Arizona Tribune - Jurors mull evidence in social media addiction trial

The jury began privately mulling evidence after being given legal instructions Friday morning by the judge.

The verdict could turn on the question of whether family and other real world troubles, or YouTube and Meta apps such as Instagram, were to blame for mental woes of the woman who filed the suit.

A 20-year-old California woman identified as Kaley G.M. testified at trial that YouTube and Instagram fueled her depression and suicidal thoughts as a child, telling jurors that she became obsessed with social media, starting with YouTube videos, at the age of six.

Under cross examination, however, Kaley also talked about feeling neglected, berated and picked on by family members.

A jury form given to jurors asks the panel to decide whether Meta or YouTube should have known their services posed a danger to children or if they were negligent in design.

If so, jurors are to decide if Meta or YouTube were "substantial factors" in causing Kaley's woes and how much they should pay in damages.

"We trust the jury to weigh the evidence carefully and deliver a verdict that reflects the facts, the harm, and the urgent need to hold Meta and Google accountable," said Matthew Bergman, a founding attorney of Social Media Victims Law Center representing Kaley.

"Whatever the outcome, this trial has already shattered the secrecy that has shielded these companies for far too long."

Meta's chief executive Mark Zuckerberg took the stand during the trial, pushing back against accusations that his company had done too little to keep underage users off his platform and had profited from their usage.

YouTube vice president of engineering Cristos Goodrow said while testifying that the Google-owned company's aim was to give people value, not hook them on harmful binge-viewing, despite aggressive growth goals at the platform.

"We don't want anybody to be addicted to anything," he said.

The lawsuit is one of hundreds accusing social media firms of luring young users to become addicted to their content and suffer from depression, eating disorders, psychiatric hospitalization and even suicide.

Internet titans have long shielded themselves with Section 230 of the US Communications Decency Act, which frees them of responsibility for what social media users post.

However, this case argues that the firms are responsible for defective products with business models designed to hold people's attention and to promote content that can harm their mental health.

The outcome of the Los Angeles trial is expected to establish a precedent for resolving other lawsuits that blame social media for fueling an epidemic of mental and emotional trauma.

J.Gomez--AT