Big Tech faces a historic legal test. A major trial over social media addiction has begun and could reshape the technology industry. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified before a jury for the first time over allegations that social media harms young people. His testimony came more than four years after leaked internal documents suggested the company knew its platforms could cause harm.
Internal documents presented in a Los Angeles courtroom seemed to confirm long-standing concerns. Meta knew preteens used its apps. The company aimed to maximize scrolling time. It also ignored expert advice on safety, although Meta said the documents were selective and outdated.
The trial will continue for weeks, and its outcome remains uncertain. However, it marks the start of a wave of lawsuits inspired by tobacco litigation in the 1990s. Plaintiffs hope these cases will trigger broad reforms across the industry.
The tobacco lawsuits led to public warnings, education campaigns, and lower smoking rates. Joseph McNally, a former federal prosecutor, said social media trials could change user behavior and corporate practices. He said the parallels between tobacco and social media are strong.
A Bellwether Case With Industry Parallels
The Los Angeles case centers on a 20-year-old woman, Kaley, and her mother. They allege four social media companies designed addictive platforms that harmed her mental health. Meta and YouTube denied the allegations. Snap and TikTok settled before trial but still face other lawsuits.
Instagram chief Adam Mosseri testified that heavy social media use can be problematic but not clinically addictive. Tech companies argued that no conclusive evidence links social media to addiction or mental health disorders.
Some lawyers said this language mirrors tobacco industry defenses. John Uustal, a lawyer who litigated against tobacco firms, said the similarities are striking. He said companies resist admitting addiction because it carries legal and reputational consequences.
Tech firms said social media benefits young people by fostering creativity and community. Some health experts agree, while others call for warning labels similar to those on tobacco products.
Kaley’s case serves as a bellwether for more than 1,500 similar lawsuits. Its outcome could influence how other cases proceed.
Meta also faces a separate trial in New Mexico over allegations of enabling child sexual exploitation. The company called those allegations sensationalist and distracting. Hundreds of lawsuits from school districts will also go to trial later this year.
Tobacco litigation unfolded over decades and gained momentum in the 1990s. Plaintiffs filed waves of lawsuits that exposed internal documents and tested new legal theories.
Targeting Platform Design in Court
Kaley’s case uses a novel legal strategy. Tech companies previously relied on Section 230 to avoid liability for user content. Her lawyers now argue harmful product design caused damage, regardless of specific content.
All four companies introduced safety tools such as parental controls, privacy settings, content restrictions, and notification limits. Families argue these tools place too much responsibility on parents and teens. They hope the trials will lead to new online safety laws.
Internal documents raised questions about how widely these safety tools are used and how effective they are. Legal experts said lawsuits can drive faster change than legislation because tech companies invest heavily in lobbying.
John Uustal said lawsuits often raise the cost of harmful practices until companies choose to fix the problem. He said this pattern has repeated across many industries.
The Stakes for Tech and the Jury
The jury has not yet heard full arguments from Meta and YouTube. Lawyers for both companies will present their defenses in the coming weeks. The verdict could shape legal strategies and outcomes in future cases.
More bellwether cases will likely follow. Different juries and facts could produce different results. Joseph McNally said repeated plaintiff losses could reduce the value of future cases. Multiple tech company losses could lead to billions in damages and force platform changes.
The jury could find one company liable and another not liable. Claims against Meta and YouTube differ, and their defenses differ as well.
Meta argued Kaley’s difficult childhood caused her mental health challenges, not social media. Her lawyers said that background increased the company’s responsibility to protect her. A Meta spokesperson said she faced significant challenges before using social media and said the company supports young users.
Zuckerberg testified that Meta improved age verification and safety policies over time. Legal expert Kimberly Pallen said this could suggest the company took these issues seriously.
YouTube argued it functions more like an entertainment platform than a social network. Kaley’s lawyers plan to call YouTube’s engineering vice president to testify. YouTube’s attorney said data shows she spent minimal time on the features claimed to be addictive.
Kimberly Pallen said the plaintiff must still prove her case despite intense public attention.
The trial could mark a turning point for social media companies. It could also define the future of digital safety litigation.
