In 2020, the documentary ‘The Social Dilemma’ received widespread critical acclaim for its eye-opening messages on the user manipulation of social media platforms and their impacts on mental health, emphasizing that “if you’re not paying for the product, you are the product”.
This reality is coming back into focus after a Los Angeles jury finds Meta, Google, and YouTube guilty for social media addiction due to their addictive platform design, resulting in over $6 million in damages.
The plaintiff, 20-year-old Kaley G.M., argued that her early use of social media, at ages six and nine, led to depression and suicidal thoughts, ultimately developing body dysmorphia. Defendant lawyers of the companies argued that KGM’s personal issues began before her social media use and that she turned to the platforms as a coping mechanism.
However, the jury found that these platforms did not appropriately inform users of the dangers of their use. This judgement, made on March 26, is being called the social media industry’s “big tobacco moment”, the same way the tobacco industry ultimately had to admit that their products were not only harmful, but that they were aware of this and knowingly hid those dangers.
For these companies, this verdict has become a harsh loss; for example, going into the trial, Meta was highly confident in the strength of its legal position on the case. This landmark verdict has brought to light for these companies that their prominence in the early 2000s for entertaining and connecting individuals around the world may not remain as robust nearly two decades later. New features such as infinite scroll, push notifications, and algorithm-driven content feeds that were once seen as innovations will now increasingly be viewed as liabilities in policy debates.
Investors are now facing concerns as this legal precedent introduces a new layer of uncertainty. Companies that once thrived on maximizing user attention must now balance revenue-generating features with ethical design, likely changing their rate of growth. The legal risks and increasing compliance costs, along with the possibility of future lawsuits, may shift investor sentiment away from social media platforms and towards companies with more transparent platform models.
The case also sets a precedent that could redefine accountability in the tech industry. If upheld and expanded upon, it opens the door for further litigation against platforms like YouTube, especially regarding younger users. If effective, these may increase legislative efforts aimed at protecting minors online, pushing governments to establish clearer boundaries around digital safety and psychological harm.
This L.A. court ruling is not just about penalizing past behavior, but about reshaping future expectations in our increasingly digital world. After a defeat for these companies, users may experience the beginning of a cultural and economic reckoning for social media. The social media industry may be forced to transition from an attention-driven model to one that prioritizes user health, fundamentally altering how these platforms are monetized in the years to come.
