Instagram and YouTube Built “Addiction Machines,” Landmark California Trial Told

A landmark trial unfolding in Los Angeles has placed the world’s largest social media companies—Instagram and YouTube—under intense scrutiny, as allegations surface that the platforms were deliberately engineered to create addictive experiences for young users. The case, brought by a plaintiff referred to as K.G.M., centers on claims that prolonged exposure to the platforms’ design features directly contributed to severe mental health struggles during her childhood.

In opening arguments before Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl and a seated jury, lead attorney Mark Lanier accused Meta and Google of building systems intentionally crafted to keep children obsessively engaged. Lanier argued that the two tech giants knowingly created “addiction machines,” purposely exploiting the neurological vulnerabilities of young users to increase time spent on their platforms and drive advertising revenue. Displaying children’s alphabet blocks spelling out “Addicting,” “Brains,” and “Children,” he emphasized the simplicity of the alleged strategy: design features that manipulate young minds.

Lanier highlighted internal documents, including excerpts from a 2015 email in which Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg reportedly demanded a 12% increase in user time spent to meet internal targets. He further accused YouTube of deliberately courting younger audiences—despite having a dedicated YouTube Kids platform—because advertisers paid more for access to teenage users. He argued that YouTube positioned itself as a convenient “digital babysitter” for overwhelmed parents, even as the company allegedly understood the risks.

In response, attorneys for Meta and YouTube rejected the notion that the platforms were a substantial factor in K.G.M.’s mental health challenges. Meta attorney Paul Schmidt painted a starkly different picture of the plaintiff’s upbringing, citing records of domestic violence, bullying, and emotional abuse in her home environment as the primary drivers of her psychological distress. Schmidt argued that the plaintiff had faced extraordinary hardships long before social media entered her life and praised her resilience in seeking help from therapists from the age of three.

The case marks the first major trial among hundreds of similar lawsuits filed across the United States, positioning it as a potential bellwether for future penalties and regulatory action. Over the coming weeks, the court is expected to hear testimony from expert witnesses, family members, whistleblowers, and top executives—including Zuckerberg, Instagram head Adam Mosseri, and YouTube CEO Neal Mohan. Former Meta employees who resigned over concerns about youth addiction are also anticipated to testify.

Beyond individual liability, the trial overlaps with significant legal pressure from U.S. states. A coalition of 29 attorneys general has petitioned a federal judge to force Meta to overhaul major components of its platforms, including removing all accounts belonging to children under 13, deleting data collected on such users, and disabling algorithms developed using that information. A subgroup of 18 states is also seeking restrictions such as banning nighttime and school-day usage for minors and deactivating features like infinite scroll, autoplay, and beauty filters.

Although Meta has introduced new safety measures for teen accounts, state prosecutors argue these are insufficient and primarily serve as public relations strategies rather than meaningful protections.

As nearly a hundred observers—including grieving parents who believe their children died due to social media–related harms—watched from the courtroom gallery, both the stakes and emotions ran high. The outcome of this six-week trial could set a precedent affecting thousands of similar cases and prompt sweeping changes to the structure and governance of major social media platforms.