Lawyers give closing arguments in landmark social media addiction trial

LOS ANGELES (AP) — After about a month of hearing from addiction experts, therapists, platform architects and executives, including Mark Zuckerberg, 12 jurors are hearing closing arguments before deciding whether social media companies should be held liable for harms to children who use their platforms.

Closing arguments in the trial began Thursday at the Spring Street Courthouse in Los Angeles. Lawyers representing the plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman, and lawyers representing the defendants, Meta and Google-owned YouTube, are presenting their cases to the jury. TikTok and Snap were also named as defendants in the lawsuit, but each settled before the trial began.

He watches: After her son’s suicide, the mother says social media platforms are designed to addict children

This case, along with two others, has been selected as a pilot trial, meaning its outcome could impact how thousands of similar lawsuits against social media companies proceed.

The plaintiff, identified in documents as KGM or Kaley, as her attorneys called her during trial, says her early use of social media led to her becoming addicted to technology and worsening depression and suicidal thoughts.

Mark Lanier, the attorney representing Cali, began his closing statement by presenting a photo of a herd of deer surrounded by a lion. He added that lions never chase the strongest or boldest deer, but rather target the deer they think are the weakest.

“I think that’s what we got in this case,” he added.

Read more: What legal experts say about a ‘groundbreaking trial’ into children’s social media addiction

In the first hour of his statement, Lanier pointed to several internal documents from Meta and YouTube that seemed to demonstrate a clear understanding of the potentially addictive nature of their platforms.

“I’m not denying the opportunity to make money, but when you make money from children, you have to do it responsibly,” he said.

Both defendants and plaintiff pointed to Callie’s troubled home life. Her lawyers say she was assaulted as a vulnerable user, but lawyers representing Meta and YouTube argued that Kaley turned to their platforms as a coping mechanism or as a way to escape her mental health struggles.

Throughout the trial, Meta said Callie faced significant challenges before she used social media. A Meta spokesperson said in a statement on Thursday that the jury’s only task was “to determine whether those conflicts would have existed without Instagram. None of her handlers identified social media as the cause.”

As Lanier reviewed the evidence and testimony presented during the trial, including Callie’s medical records and testimony, he said the young girl did not want to bring up her constant social media use at the risk of her phone being stolen. He said she would return to the platforms despite being on the receiving end of cyberbullying because it was easier for her to endure the bullying than to remain off the platforms, echoing her testimony in late February.

In a press conference with reporters earlier, a legal spokesperson for Meta also said they do not believe youth’s mental health struggles, broadly and with Cali specifically, can be resolved through litigation.

Instead of focusing on Kelly’s mental health history, lawyers representing YouTube have consistently argued that it is not a social media platform and that its features are not addictive. YouTube has also repeatedly compared its platform to television, asserting that it does not have the same social verification features as Instagram and other platforms.

He watches: Zuckerberg stands in landmark trial over youth addiction to social media

Lanier, who used drawings and illustrations throughout the trial to help jurors follow testimony and visualize the points being made, also brought out a cupcake to visualize a point related to the instructions for jurors that Judge Carolyn B. Cole had prepared for them earlier Thursday morning.

Jurors must decide whether Meta and YouTube’s negligence was a “substantial factor” in causing Cali’s harm. He said the Lanier cupcakes shown to jurors had very little baking soda in them, causing them to rise, but it was an intrinsic factor in the baking process.

Because it is a civil case, only nine out of 12 jurors have to agree on each charge. They will decide the case against each platform independently, and the judge advised them to treat it “as if it were a separate lawsuit.”

Jurors will also decide how much damages to award to Kaley if they find either or both platforms liable. Lanier advised them to consider one question while deciding on this amount: “How much is a lost childhood worth?”

Ortutay reported from Coloma, California.