She spent 16 hours on Instagram. It’s up to a jury to decide if Meta is to blame
She spent 16 hours on Instagram. It’s up to a jury to decide if Meta is to blame
Kaley’s 16-hour stretch on Instagram became a focal point in a landmark legal battle. She described how she’d spend hours scrolling through the platform until she drifted into sleep, only to rise in the dead of night to review her notifications. Her routine continued into the morning, as she opened the app immediately upon waking. “I stopped engaging with my family because I was spending all my time on social media,” Kaley testified before a Los Angeles jury, representing a wave of cases targeting Meta and Google.
TikTok and Snapchat, also named in her original suit, resolved their disputes through out-of-court settlements. Kaley, whose identity is shielded by her first name or initials, has become a symbol for over 2,000 similar lawsuits. These cases aim to hold social media giants accountable for alleged harm to the mental health of younger users. The five-week trial, now underway, has drawn attention from legal experts and parents who claim their children were affected by addictive content and psychological pressure.
The Legal Battle
At the heart of the lawsuit are questions about whether social media companies intentionally engineered addictive features. Lori Schott, a mother who attended the trial despite not being a direct party, recounted how her daughter Annalee, 18, took her own life. Schott argued that Instagram exposed her to harmful content, even as the company was aware of its impact on youth. “They hid the research. They knew it was addictive. They gave us a false sense of security,” she told the BBC, emphasizing the company’s public relations efforts to downplay risks.
Aaron Ping, another parent, shared his son Avery’s story. Avery, 16, transitioned from being a “adventure companion” to a source of conflict over YouTube use. “We wrote up this agreement with his school counsellors, outlining what he had to accomplish to earn screen time,” Ping explained. Despite Meta and YouTube’s policies, Kaley had created multiple accounts on both platforms to boost engagement, posting selfies and videos of her singing. She sought validation through likes and interactions, often at the expense of real-world connections.
Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s co-founder and CEO, appeared in court for the first time to defend his platforms. His testimony followed a history of hundreds of lawsuits against the company. If the jury rules in Kaley’s favor, it could challenge decades of legal norms that treat social media as neutral spaces. The decision might also set the stage for historic settlements, with ripple effects across thousands of ongoing cases in the U.S. legal system.
Parents’ Perspectives
Public and political pressure against tech giants has intensified in recent years. Even if the Los Angeles jury does not hold Meta or Google responsible, parents and governments continue to push for restrictions on social media use by children. They cite concerns ranging from unrealistic beauty standards to exposure to online predators. Kaley’s testimony, alongside stories from other families, underscores the growing demand for accountability in how platforms are designed and marketed.
Meta claims to prohibit users under 13 from its platforms, while YouTube offers child-friendly versions like YouTube Kids. However, the trial has highlighted how these policies may not prevent harm. The outcome of this case could redefine the legal landscape, forcing companies to address whether their algorithms and interfaces are engineered to keep young users engaged, sometimes at a cost to their well-being.