YouTube rejects addiction claims in landmark social media trial
In the US trial targeting tech giants, YouTube argued it is not addictive or a social media platform.
· CNA · JoinRead a summary of this article on FAST.
Get bite-sized news via a new
cards interface. Give it a try.
Click here to return to FAST Tap here to return to FAST
FAST
LOS ANGELES: YouTube's legal team insisted Tuesday (Feb 10) that the Google-owned video platform was not intentionally addictive or even technically social media, on the second day of a landmark US trial targeting tech giants.
YouTube and Meta - the parent company of Instagram and Facebook - are defendants in a blockbuster trial in Los Angeles that could set a legal precedent on whether social media juggernauts deliberately designed their platforms to be addictive to children.
"It's not social media addiction when it's not social media and it's not addiction," lawyer Luis Li told the 12 jurors on the second day of arguments.
The civil trial in California state court focuses on allegations that a 20-year-old woman, identified as Kaley G.M., suffered severe mental harm because she became addicted to social media as a child.
Kaley G.M. started using YouTube at the age of six and joined Instagram at 11, before moving on to Snapchat and TikTok two or three years later.
The plaintiff "is not addicted to YouTube. You can listen to her own words ... she said so, her doctor said so, her father said so," Li said, citing evidence that would be detailed at the trial.
Li's opening arguments followed remarks on Monday from lawyers for the plaintiffs and co-defendant Meta.
The lawyer insisted to the six men and six women on the jury that he "just did not recognise" the description of YouTube put forth by plaintiffs' lawyers.
This was in response to the lawyer for the plaintiff who accused YouTube and Meta of engineering addiction in young people's brains in order to gain users and profits.
What YouTube is selling "is the ability to watch something essentially for free on your computer, on your phone, on your iPad," Li insisted.
"More people watch YouTube on television than they do on their phones or their devices. More people watch YouTube than cable TV," he said.
Li argued it was the quality of content that kept users coming back for more, citing internal company emails that allegedly showed a rejection of virality to the benefit of educational and more socially useful content.
The blockbuster case is being treated as a bellwether proceeding whose outcome could set the tone for a tidal wave of similar litigation across the United States.
Social media firms are accused in hundreds of lawsuits of leading young users to become addicted to content and suffer from depression, eating disorders, psychiatric hospitalisation and even suicide.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs are borrowing strategies used in the 1990s and 2000s against the tobacco industry, which faced a similar onslaught of lawsuits arguing that companies knowingly sold a harmful product.
Sign up for our newsletters
Get our pick of top stories and thought-provoking articles in your inbox
Get the CNA app
Stay updated with notifications for breaking news and our best stories
Get WhatsApp alerts
Join our channel for the top reads for the day on your preferred chat app