Big blow to Meta-Youtube in case related to social media addiction, compensation of millions of dollars decided

A very important and historic decision has come out from America, which has raised a big question on the responsibility of tech companies. A Los Angeles jury has acknowledged for the first time that the design of social media platforms can be harmful to children. After this decision, legal pressure on big tech companies is likely to increase further. The jury has found Meta and YouTube guilty.

The allegation was that these platforms have been made in such a way that children spend more time on them and gradually get addicted to them. The court has ordered the companies to pay compensation of $6 million to the 20-year-old plaintiff, identified only as “KGM”. According to the jury’s decision, 70 percent of the total compensation will have to be paid to Meta, while the remaining amount will have to be paid by YouTube. Additionally, the plaintiffs have also been awarded an additional $3 million in punitive damages, bringing the total amount to an additional $3 million.

What was the matter?

The plaintiff had filed a case against Instagram, TikTok and YouTube. He said that the addictive features of these platforms affected his mental condition in his childhood. Even before the hearing of the case started, TikTok and Snap had reached a mutual settlement, while Meta and YouTube presented their side in the court.

response of companies

After the decision, Meta said that it does not agree with this decision and is considering further legal options. At the same time, Google also said in favor of YouTube that it is a streaming platform, not traditional social media, and it will appeal against this decision. During the hearing, Instagram head Adam Mosseri disagreed that social media is addictive. At the same time, Mark Zuckerberg admitted that in the initial phase the company’s goal was to increase the time of users on the platform.

During the trial, the plaintiff told that he had started using social media at a very young age, around 8-9 years of age. Gradually she started spending most of her time especially on Instagram. The plaintiff’s lawyer argued that features like “infinite scroll” were deliberately created in such a way that users remain connected to the app for a long time.

Why is this decision important?

This case is considered special because it is one of the first cases in which the design of social media has been considered a direct cause of harm. Due to this, new rules and strict laws may be made for tech companies in the coming time.