LOS ANGELES — The first plaintiff to take major social media companies to trial is expected to take the stand Wednesday to speak about the harms she says the tech platforms inflicted on her mental health as a child.
The plaintiff, who is now 20 and is identified in court by her initials, K.G.M., is at the center of a bellwether case in Los Angeles County Superior Court that could set a legal precedent about whether social media platforms are responsible for causing mental health issues in children.
The trial is the first in a consolidated group of cases brought against Instagram, YouTube, TikTok and Snap by more than 1,600 plaintiffs, including over 350 families and over 250 school districts. The plaintiffs accuse the tech companies of knowingly designing addictive products harmful to young users’ mental health.
K.G.M., who was a minor at the time of the incidents outlined in her lawsuit, claims that her early use of social media led to addiction and worsened her mental health problems. Her lawsuit alleges that social media companies made deliberate design choices to make their platforms more addictive to children for purposes of profit.
“Defendants know children are in a developmental stage that leaves them particularly vulnerable to the addictive effects of these features,” her lawsuit says. “Defendants target them anyway, in pursuit of additional profit.”
Historically, social media platforms have largely been shielded by Section 230, a provision added to the Communications Act of 1934 that says internet companies are not liable for content users post. TikTok and Snap reached settlements with K.G.M. before the trial, but they remain defendants in a series of similar lawsuits expected to go to trial this year.
The lawsuit highlights a variety of features that it claims the platforms use to “exploit children and adolescents,” including “an algorithmically-generated, endless feed to keep users scrolling,” rewards that encourage people to keep using the platform, and “incessant” notifications, as well as “inadequate” measures for age verification and parental control.
“Disconnected ‘Likes’ have replaced the intimacy of adolescent friendships. Mindless scrolling has displaced the creativity of play and sport,” the lawsuit says. “While presented as ‘social,’ [the platforms] have in myriad ways promoted disconnection, disassociation, and a legion of resulting mental and physical harms.”
Victoria Burke, the plaintiff’s former therapist, testified on Wednesday that K.G.M. experienced body dysmorphia and social phobia at age 13.
During that time, Burke said K.G.M. would use her phone to avoid social interaction at school while appearing as though she’s “doing something rather than sitting and being perceived as having no friends.”
When asked why she never diagnosed K.G.M. with social media addiction, Burke clarified that it’s not an official diagnosis in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a standardized guide published by the American Psychiatric Association.
Ahead of K.G.M.’s testimony, youth leaders and parents also held a press conference outside the courtroom in support of the plaintiff.
Lennon Torres of HEAT Initiative, a nonprofit child safety advocacy group, told reporters that she asks for “safety by design,” which includes third-party verification of the safety features implemented by tech platforms.
“Let me be very clear about one thing: the verdict in this case is not the point. That is not justice. This is justice. We have found a microphone and a voice that breaks through their predatory algorithms, and we will be heard.”
Nikki Iyer, co-chair of Design It For Us, a policy advocacy coalition focused on online platforms, said her generation is not just the most digitally connected, but also “the loneliest generation.”
“Growing up, I experienced theft — theft of my attention, theft of my childhood, theft of the childhood of millions,” Iyer said. “And not only was it theft, big tech took our childhood and renamed it and reshaped it, morphed it into something that they said would benefit us.”
Meta on Wednesday filed an opposition to the plaintiff’s bench brief, arguing that K.G.M.’s mental health conditions were caused by issues at home rather than the design of social platforms.
The court filing pointed to “numerous examples of ‘emotional abuse and neglect by [Plaintiff’s] mother, including prolonged periods of the silent treatment, frequent name-calling (e.g., ‘dumb,’ ‘stupid’), and mocking of her voice,’ and ‘physical abuse, including hitting the plaintiff.’”
Tech executives defend their platforms
So far during the trial, K.G.M.’s lawyers have called on Instagram head Adam Mosseri, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and YouTube’s vice president of engineering, Cristos Goodrow, to testify before the jury.
