Instagram Chief to testify in major social media addiction trial

YouTube and Meta face landmark legal challenge

YouTube and Meta — the parent company of Instagram and Facebook — are defendants in a high-profile civil trial that could establish a legal precedent on whether major social media companies intentionally built their platforms to foster addiction among children.

Opening statements began this week before a 12-member jury in California state court.

YouTube rejects addiction and “Social Media” label

YouTube’s lawyer, Luis Li, told jurors the Google-owned video platform is neither social media nor intentionally addictive.

“It’s not social media addiction when it’s not social media and it’s not addiction,” Li said in his opening remarks.

He argued that YouTube functions more like Netflix or traditional television, offering users free video content across devices. Li said user return rates are driven by content quality, not addictive design, and cited internal emails showing executives prioritised educational and socially useful material over viral trends.

Case centers on mental harm claim

The lawsuit focuses on a 20-year-old woman identified as Kaley G.M., who alleges she suffered severe mental harm after becoming addicted to social media beginning in childhood.

According to court details, she began using YouTube at age six, joined Instagram at 11, and later started using Snapchat and TikTok two to three years afterward.

Li disputed the addiction claim, telling jurors that the plaintiff, her doctor, and her father all stated she was not addicted to YouTube, and said supporting evidence would be presented during the trial.

Plaintiffs accuse platforms of engineering addiction

Earlier, plaintiffs’ attorney Mark Lanier argued that both YouTube and Meta deliberately design their platforms to create addiction in young users to drive engagement and profit.

“This case is about two of the richest corporations in history who have engineered addiction in children's brains,” Lanier said. “They don’t only build apps; they build traps.”

Expert witness compares social media to a drug

Stanford University School of Medicine professor Anna Lembke testified as the first witness for the plaintiffs, describing social media broadly as a drug-like stimulus.

Lembke, author of Dopamine Nation, told jurors that the brain’s self-control mechanisms are typically not fully developed until about age 25, making teenagers more prone to risky behavior and less able to judge long-term consequences.

She described YouTube — which the plaintiff first used at age six — as a potential “gateway drug” due to its accessibility.

Bellwether case for nationwide litigation

The trial is being treated as a bellwether case that could influence numerous similar lawsuits across the United States.

Social media companies currently face hundreds of legal claims alleging their platforms contribute to youth addiction, depression, eating disorders, psychiatric hospitalisation, and suicide.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers are using legal strategies similar to those deployed in major cases against the tobacco industry in the 1990s and 2000s, when companies were accused of knowingly selling harmful products.