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 obsession with Instagram began early, with hours spent scrolling through the platform until she drifted into sleep. She would check her notifications during the night and launch the app immediately after waking. One day, she spent an entire 16-hour stretch on the social network, according to her testimony in a pivotal lawsuit against Meta and Google. “I neglected my family because I was consumed by social media,” Kaley told the jury in Los Angeles, marking a key moment in the case.

TikTok and Snapchat, initially part of the suit, resolved their disputes through out-of-court settlements. Kaley, who remains anonymous to protect her privacy, has become a symbol for over 2,000 similar cases targeting tech giants. The five-week trial is being closely followed by legal analysts and parents who believe social media has contributed to their children’s mental health struggles, including cases linked to suicide.

Lori Schott, a mother whose daughter Annalee died by suicide at 18, attended the trial for several days. She claims Instagram exposed her to harmful content without warning, despite knowing its addictive potential. “They concealed the research. They gave us a false sense of security,” Schott told the BBC, describing how the company’s public relations efforts downplayed the platform’s impact. “Their PR team painted the world as full of lollipops and unicorns.”

Aaron Ping, another parent, watched the trial with the same intensity. His son Avery, 16, took his own life, shifting from a close companion to a frequent source of conflict over YouTube usage. “We drafted an agreement with school counselors to limit his screen time,” Ping explained. “He had to meet specific goals to earn a set amount of online engagement.” Meta and YouTube have not commented on the testimonies from Schott and Ping.

Kaley’s testimony revealed her early exposure to social media, starting at six on YouTube and nine on Instagram. While Meta claims to restrict users under 13, YouTube offers child-friendly versions like YouTube Kids. Kaley created multiple accounts to boost likes and views, seeking validation through content she posted—selfies and singing videos. The lawsuit hinges on whether these platforms were designed to foster addiction among young users.

The trial’s outcome could redefine legal standards for social media companies. Judge Carolyn Kuhl noted that the case presents “completely unprecedented” issues, challenging decades of precedent that treated platforms as neutral tools. If the jury rules in favor of Kaley, it may set a precedent for future settlements against Meta and others. Meanwhile, public and political pressure on tech giants continues, with calls to restrict screen time for children gaining momentum.

Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s co-founder and CEO, testified in person for the first time, defending his company’s platforms. Despite facing hundreds of lawsuits, his appearance underscored the trial’s importance. The jury’s decision could influence thousands of ongoing cases and reshape how tech companies are held accountable for their impact on youth.