Jurors of a Los Angeles County court recently found Meta and YouTube liable for the negligent creation of addictive online platforms. The case, K.G.M v. Meta et al., pertains to a young woman—referred to as KGM—who sued Meta and YouTube for creating addictive products that fostered her childhood depression and anxiety. On March 25, jurors decided that Meta and YouTube should pay a combined six million dollars in damages.
Some Notre Dame students supported the ruling, suggesting it was a justified way of penalizing addictive platforms that they agreed were dangerous. However, most students interviewed by the Rover argued instead that it is the role of households, with the help of federal legislation, to restrict social media use among children—not the platforms themselves.
Many prominent sources have described K.G.M v. Meta et al. as a landmark case in social media legality, as this case marks the first time Silicon Valley has been found responsible for social media addictions. Some attribute this success to the jury’s focus on the algorithmic design of social media platforms rather than on the content they allow—a focus which puts K.G.M v. Meta et al. in contrast to many other Silicon Valley lawsuits.
Meta responded to the jury’s decision by claiming that “teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app.” On behalf of YouTube, Google spokesman,José Castañeda stated that the “case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site.”
Several anti-social media advocates have voiced their support for the ruling and its future implications on social media restrictions. Tennessee senator and co-sponsor of the Kids Online Safety Act, Marsha Blackburn, said in response to the ruling, “Big Tech has done everything in its power to blame parents and children instead of taking responsibility for designing their products to addict and harm children.”
Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal said in a public statement, “This verdict is the beginning of real justice for parents across the country that have suffered and faced heartbreaking loss from Big Tech’s greed.”
However, other prominent figures opposed the ruling, raising legal concerns over corporate liability and free speech. Eric Goldman, a professor at Santa Clara University, criticized the legal legitimacy of trauma by stating, “KGM’s life was full of trauma. … It is highly likely that most or all of the other plaintiffs in the social media addiction cases have sources of trauma in their lives that might negate the responsibility of social media.”
Leaders of Fight for the Future, an advocacy group for digital rights and online privacy, supported the decision but expressed concern for the precedent it sets, stating, “It’s good that people are suing these companies and winning in court to reduce their power and force them to change their policies, but we are concerned how the verdict in KGM’s case will be used to advocate for laws that could threaten free speech online.”
Free-speech advocate Ethan Zuckerman sued Meta in 2024 over concerns similar to those contained in K.G.M v. Meta et al. Explaining the reason for his lawsuit, he said, “I’m suing Facebook to make it better. We’re bringing this lawsuit to give people more control over their social media experience and data and to expand knowledge about how platforms shape public discourse.”
Other debates that have circulated through the media following K.G.M v. Meta et al. have emphasized the role of parents in preventing their young children from accessing the dangers of social media. Meta’s legal defense argued throughout the case that Meta and YouTube already have strict guidelines concerning the age of their users and, beyond those guidelines, it is not their responsibility to dictate who has access to their products. However, the jury decided the very design of their products negligently creates addictions which are not made clear in their guidelines.
Many Notre Dame students shared stories of their own struggles with social media addictions.
A student in Alumni Hall told the Rover, “I gave up Instagram for Lent because of how much I was using it. The instant gratification, dopamine structure of the apps is dangerous, but the most concerning is the short-form content for me personally. I think the short-form content is what makes the apps so addictive.”
He added, “Even if social media websites created stricter guidelines for children, there’s not much you can do if a kid gets a laptop in their hands. There’s not a realistic, non-invasive way to truly prevent children from using social media. It should be a family matter.”
A student living in Keenan Hall held a similar view concerning who is responsible for social media addictions. He explained, “I find social media very similar to drug usage. Parents should prevent their children from using cocaine, but they shouldn’t be legally responsible if their kids end up using it. Just like drugs, we need both governmental and legal restrictions that prevent access to them, but parents should also help prevent these things from happening. Ultimately, we need parents, legislators, and individuals to take up collective responsibility for the addictions our society has.”
A senior from O’Neil Hall told the Rover, “It’s crazy how these apps suck you in. Sometimes, I just want to take a one-minute scroll for a quick break, and then 15 minutes pass by and you don’t even notice. The algorithm and even the motion of scrolling creates that addiction. … Social media websites are the ones responsible for addictions because of how they create their products to be addictive.”
A student from Farley Hall focused her criticism on the algorithm itself, saying, “[S]ocial media apps purposely put stuff onto your feed that they know appeals to your interests and what you’ve liked before. The algorithm creates a time-suck because you are constantly being fed with stuff the app knows you are addicted to. I’ll be on Instagram reels for an hour, but it will only feel like a couple of minutes.”
Raymond Webber is a sophomore philosophy major. His favorite hobby is listening to Bishop Fulton Sheen homilies on YouTube. Contact him at rwebber2@nd.edu.