Discussion

• @andymstone Andy Stone on x

  Meta statement on LA verdict: “We respectfully disagree with the verdict and will appeal.  Teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app.  We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously as every case is different, and we remain confident in our re…

• @superwuster Tim Wu on x

  Here is the long-term significance of today's Los Angeles social media trial victory: it is a move away from a conversation about speech and innovation, and toward bringing public health concerns decisively to the legal forefront. Read more here: https://www.nytimes.com/...

• @meghanncuniff Meghann Cuniff on x

  “He's the guru, so to speak, and he should have really, really known what he was going to say out to us jurors, before he even said anything,” the juror said of Zuckerberg.

• @taylorlorenz Taylor Lorenz on x

  This verdict will lead to “a lot more heavy-handed censorship and privacy invasions by platforms to comply with junk science-based jury verdicts and looming legislative threats. Biggest tech players have the ability to weather the storm. Mid- and small-sized platforms won't.”

• @enbrown Elizabeth Nolan Brown on x

  Because of Section 230, state attorneys general are stuck prosecuting individual criminals—a task paramount to public safety, but not great at garnering massive payouts to state coffers or getting national attention. THAT'S why they hate it.

• @senmarkey Ed Markey on x

  My Statement on the Social Media Addiction Trial Verdict [image] “Big Tech's Big Tobacco moment has arrived.  Today's verdict against Meta and Google is a historic moment for protecting young people online...”

• @enbrown Elizabeth Nolan Brown on x

  The Meta ruling is bad, no matter how much you dislike Meta or how much New Mexico tries to pretend its about “product design” It's an attempt to get around Section 230 (& 1A) protections, hold platforms liable for user speech, do universal age verification & end encrypted msg [i…

• @abc7abigail Abigail Velez on x

  “We disagree with the verdict and plan to appeal. This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site.” -José Castañeda, Google spokesperson

• @swiftstories Mike Swift on x

  Just to correct the Guv, in this case, it was actually the state of New Mexico that stepped up, although California @AGRobBonta will be the lead state in the state AG trial scheduled for August in Oakland.

• @bedoyausa Alvaro Bedoya on x

  Quick thoughts on the Meta/YouTube verdict: (1) A jury of regular people has managed to do what Congress and even state legislatures have not: Hold Meta and Google accountable for addicting young people to their products. Astonishingly, the tech giants have managed to avoid [imag…

• @malinowski Tom Malinowski on x

  This is a huge deal. If juries are affirming that social media is designed to be addictive & are awarding damages, legislators should now be able to ban the addictive features that have done so much harm to the mental health of our kids and the fabric of our democracy.

• @nickgillespie Nick Gillespie on x

  The '90s debate over violent TV/movies/videogames is back, now with more ‘science’ and moral panic.

• @tristanharris Tristan Harris on x

  The verdict is in. Meta, YouTube both found negligent in social media addiction trial. Everything we predicted in 2013-2017. https://www.cnbc.com/...

• @marshablackburn Sen. Marsha Blackburn on x

  Today's verdict in the landmark social media case marks a monumental victory for parents and children who have had the door slammed in their face by Big Tech for years. It's time for Congress to enshrine protections for American families into law by passing #KOSA. @SenTedCruz

• @superwuster Tim Wu on x

  No more excuses for defective social media products https://www.nbclosangeles.com/ ...

• @ericldaugh Eric Daugherty on x

  🚨 BREAKING: In a MASSIVE jury verdict, Google and Meta have just been found LIABLE for getting children addicted to social media — a $3 million reward in damages has been ordered to one plaintiff “This is blood in the water.” This could impact THOUSANDS of social media cases. [vi…

• @taylorlorenz Taylor Lorenz on x

  Outside the LA courthouse parents who say social media addiction killed their children outline the policies they want to come as a result of this legal win: - Senate version of KOSA w/ strong duty of care - Reform/repeal Section 230 - Age verification laws [video]

• @wsjopinion @wsjopinion on x

  The verdict against Meta and YouTube is a victory for the plaintiffs bar—not for children or society. https://www.wsj.com/...

• @bedoyausa Alvaro Bedoya on x

  A few quick reflections on the Meta/Google verdict: (1) A jury of regular people has managed to do what Congress and even state legislatures have not: Hold Meta and Google accountable for addicting young people to their products...  (2) This is a stark warning to AI chatbot compa…

• @bedoyausa Alvaro Bedoya on x

  No. Don't blame parents for a product that was painstakingly designed by thousands of people to addict teens. Meta knew that Insta hurt teen girls. They knew it led to body dysmorphia; they even saw evidence it led to thoughts of self-harm. They did it anyways and made billions.

• @rebeccamkern Rebecca Kern on x

  This is a huge ruling, a break in the Section 230 defense Meta and YouTube have been using for years

• @cagovernor Governor Gavin Newsom on x

  Big Tech is finally answering for the harm it has caused our children — after years of fighting against common sense regulations, today's verdict shows that they can't escape accountability.  California isn't backing down.  We've enacted the nation's strongest protections, and we…

• @senatordurbin Senator Dick Durbin on x

  These back-to-back decisions in New Mexico and California show that Big Tech has become Big Tobacco. Now, it's time for Congress to sunset Section 230 once and for all.

• @meghanncuniff Meghann Cuniff on x

  Two jurors spoke to reporters in the courthouse hallway about their $6 million verdict against Meta and YouTube. ($3M compensatory | $3M punitive, 70% Meta | 30% YouTube) One said Mark Zuckerberg's testimony “was not, it was — he changed it, and that didn't sit well with us.”

• @rondesantis Ron DeSantis on x

  Big implications right here... [image]

• @bedoyausa Alvaro Bedoya on x

  (4) When I was working for Senator Franken, I learned that the NSA was the nation's top recruiter of math PhDs. Now is a good time to recognize that tech companies employ armies of psychologists. Some work to help users. Most make the platforms more “engaging,” i.e. addictive. [i…

• @nicoperrino Nico Perrino on x

  How you design and display your speech product is an editorial choice integral to the speech itself.  How a publisher lays out his newspaper or website is an editorial choice.  So is adding cliffhangers to the end of TV shows.  Those choices are — and should be — protected by the…

• @jonhaidt Jonathan Haidt on x

  Great analysis from Tim Wu: Social media is a defective, hazardous product, and states have the right to act to protect their children from dangerous products.

• @marshablackburn Sen. Marsha Blackburn on x

  Juries in New Mexico and California are decisively holding Meta accountable. Now, Congress must do the same by passing the Kids Online Safety Act. [video]

• @akilahobviously Akilah Hughes on x

  I've never read comments or seen video responses on Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, HBOMax... YouTube is deluding itself. [image]

• @judiciarydems @judiciarydems on x

  BREAKING: In ANOTHER loss for Big Tech, a California jury just ruled against Meta, YouTube in landmark social media addiction trial.

• @jason_kint Jason Kint on x

  On landmark Meta and Google child harm verdicts, it's critical to note this isn't a one-off. It's been 10+ years of prioritizing profits over people. Massive surveillance advertising + monopoly businesses. Cambridge Analytica. Data leakage. Search + adtech monopolies. Recidivism.

• @bedoyausa Alvaro Bedoya on x

  (4) Re-upping this from earlier. We need to wake up to the role that psychologists and neuroscientists have played within companies like Meta in making the platforms more addictive. [image]

• @akilahobviously Akilah Hughes on x

  We are gonna zoom out from this era one day and ask wtf we were thinking letting a bunch of narcissistic tech dudes lead the culture.

• @adamthierer Adam Thierer on x

  While many will be divided on the outcome of “Internet addiction” cases like this, one thing should be clear: Cases like this will likely unleash a trial lawyer bonanza via a much broader wave of (mostly frivolous) lawsuits.  Every tort lawyer in America is probably thinking abou…

• @jonathanturley Jonathan Turley on x

  The verdict against Google and Meta is clearly a seismic event with thousands of lawsuits in the works. However, the legal basis for this ruling remains highly challengeable in my view. I have taught torts for 30 years and remain skeptical about the causation links in the case...

• @tomsteyer Tom Steyer on x

  We need to ban social media for children under 16. The evidence linking these platforms to young people's mental health issues is too clear.

• @judiciarydems @judiciarydems on x

  Double whammy for Big Tech. Time's up. REGULATE.

• @scvanvalkenburg Senator Schuyler VanValkenburg on x

  We can protect free speech and kids. For too long we've let social media companies addict our kids to their products. It's why I carried SB854 to create a more responsible default for how our kids use social media. To make it less addictive. https://www.nytimes.com/...

• @jonhaidt Jonathan Haidt on x

  Victory in the social media trial in LA!  As of today, we are in a new world: a new era in the fight to protect children from online harms.  A jury sided with Kaley and therefore with millions of children: Big Tech is harming kids on an industrial scale.  For years, parents were …

• @tristansnell Tristan Snell on x

  Social media is officially the new tobacco It is DESIGNED to be ADDICTIVE And it is time for them to pay

• @enbrown Elizabeth Nolan Brown on x

  Saying “this isn't about speech, it's about consumer protection” or “this isn't about speech, it's about product design” is just the latest tactic from state attorneys general greedy for cash & cache. they've been trying this in different forms for decades https://reason.com/...

• @kamalaharris Kamala Harris on x

  Long before today's ruling, we knew social media was harming our young people.  Teens, parents, advocates, and even casual observers begged tech and elected leaders to take action.  While we applaud this decision, we have much more work to do to protect young people online and su…

• @meghanncuniff Meghann Cuniff on x

  The two jurors who disagreed with every answer (both are women) did not speak to reporters, but their tones during polling indicated they REALLY disagree. After 8 days of deliberation, the defense teams will have a lot to dig through as they prepare their motions for new trial.

• @naominixwrites Naomi Nix on x

  There are so many takeaways from the LA and New Mexico rulings but I'll highlight three. 1) The academic research, which has limited experimental designs, has been mixed on the connection between mental distress and social media. The companies own docs were crucial to the case.

• @hawleymo Josh Hawley on x

  For years these scumbag social media companies have ruined kids' lives and made BILLIONS off it. Today they got caught. Now Congress needs to find some courage and do its job to protect more kids from these con artists

• @agrobbonta Rob Bonta on x

  Juries in Los Angeles and New Mexico have found Meta responsible for what we at CA DOJ know to be true: Meta is prioritizing profits over the safety of children and violating consumer protection laws.  We congratulate @NewMexicoDOJ and CA families for standing up to Meta and secu…

• @newjerseyoag Attorney General Jennifer Davenport on bluesky

  The verdicts against Meta confirm what we've known all along: they are harming our kids.  —  As a parent, I am committed to holding Meta accountable - and we'll do just that when we go to trial later this year.  Our kids deserve better.  —  www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-ne...

• @laurenfeiner Lauren Feiner on bluesky

  Wow - huge win across the board for plaintiff Kaley G.M. in the landmark social media addiction case against Meta and YouTube.  On the heels of Meta's loss in New Mexico just the day before. www.theverge.com/policy/90065...

• @rweingarten Randi Weingarten on bluesky

  Corporations shouldn't be able to push addictive products on our kids.  We took steps to reign in Big Tobacco, and now Big Tech is being held accountable for the addiction and mental health problems it knowingly causes while rushing to profit. www.cnbc.com/2026/03/25/m...

• @mischamouse Mischa on bluesky

  Let the literal flood of lawsuits begin.  I'd enjoy seeing Zuckerberg sued into poverty.  —  www.bbc.com/news/article...

• @elfsternberg Elf M. Sternberg on bluesky

  Facebook argued that child exploitation and abuse is a fact of life, so it had only minimal responsibility to prevent people from using its products to commit it.  The court didn't buy it: arstechnica.com/tech-policy/ ...

• @naominix Naomi Nix on bluesky

  There are so many takeaways from the LA and New Mexico rulings but I'll highlight three.  —  1) The academic research, which has limited experimental designs, has been mixed on the connection between mental distress and social media.  The companies own docs were crucial to the ca…

• @blumenthal.senate.gov Richard Blumenthal on bluesky

  This verdict is the beginning of real justice for parents across the country that have suffered & faced heartbreaking loss from Big Tech's greed.  1/

• @blumenthal.senate.gov Richard Blumenthal on bluesky

  I would urge any member of Congress that continues to do Mark Zuckerberg's bidding to look at this verdict & their conscience.  It's time to enact the Kids Online Safety Act into law. 3

• @blumenthal.senate.gov Richard Blumenthal on bluesky

  It is also powerful proof that the Kids Online Safety Act—to provide accountability & protections for all young people in America—is urgently needed.  2/

• @emily.space Emily Hunt on bluesky

  If this verdict holds, I can see this lawsuit being a landmark case: if social media companies are liable for making addictive apps, then it could massively limit the extent to which they can use algorithms to harm people.

• @pqpolitics Pete Quily on bluesky

  Their decision will likely transform the already heated debate over social media addiction as a concept, what role apps may play in engineering it, and whether individuals like Kaley can prove they're afflicted.  —  www.latimes.com/california/s... #tech #addiction

• @robertscotthorton Scott Horton on bluesky

  In Santa Fe and Los Angeles, the same claims, the same evidence, the same results.  In particular, both juries found Zuckerberg's protestations of innocence to be untruthful. www.latimes.com/california/s...

• @tiffanycli@mastodon.social Tiffany Li on mastodon

  This is a big deal.  Court finds Meta and Google liable for kids' social media addiction under product liability theories.  This strategy gets around Section 230 protections because the focus is on the platforms' product designs, not the content posted by users. https://www.latim…

• r/California r on reddit

  Jury finds Meta and YouTube negligent in landmark lawsuit on social media safety

• r/neutralnews r on reddit

  Jury orders Meta and Google to pay woman $6 million in social media addiction trial

• r/StockMarket r on reddit

  Jury in Los Angeles finds Meta, YouTube negligent in social media addiction trial

• r/inthenews r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube found liable in landmark social media addiction trial

• r/technology r on reddit

  Jury orders Meta and Google to pay woman $3 million in social media addiction trial

• r/centrist r on reddit

  Jury in Los Angeles finds Meta, YouTube negligent in social media addiction trial

• r/LinusTechTips r on reddit

  Meta and Google found liable in landmark social media addiction trial

• r/InterstellarKinetics r on reddit

  BREAKING: A Jury Just Ordered Meta And YouTube To Pay $3 Million In The First-Ever Social Media Addiction Trial, Opening The Door To 1,600 More Lawsuits 💰💥

• r/DeepStateCentrism r on reddit

  Meta and Youtube Lose Landmark Social Media Trial

• r/BoycottUnitedStates r on reddit

  Jury finds Meta and Google liable in social media addiction trial!  Let's get rid of their products next? :)

• r/Fauxmoi r on reddit

  Jury holds Meta and Google liable for role in young woman's mental health issues.  Awards $3 million in compensatory damages with Meta paying 70% of that amount.

• r/degoogle r on reddit

  Good news - Jury finds Meta and Google liable in social media addiction trial!

• r/popculturechat r on reddit

  Meta and Google found liable in social media addiction trial

• r/goodnews r on reddit

  Meta and Google found liable in social media addiction trial

• r/technology r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube found liable in social media addiction trial

• r/worldnews r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube found liable in social media addiction trial

• r/wallstreetbets r on reddit

  Jury in Los Angeles finds Meta, YouTube negligent in social media addiction trial

• r/daddit r on reddit

  Jury in Los Angeles finds Meta, YouTube negligent in social media addiction trial

• @meghanncuniff Meghann Cuniff on x

  The jury returned the same verdict for YouTube. Yes to all questions. KGM's compensatory damages are $3 million. Meta gets 70% of the blame, YouTube 30%. Jurors said YES to malice and fraud,

• @bobbyallyn Bobby Allyn on x

  One of the jurors, who gave her name as Victoria, addressed reporters in the courtroom hallway after the verdict standing next to the jury foreman, Matthew. Victoria said: “we wanted them to feel it, we wanted them to know this was unacceptable.”

• @bedoyausa Alvaro Bedoya on x

  Jurors have now recommended an additional $3 million in punitive damages, for a tentative total of $6M to K.G.M., the plaintiff. Every single AI company running parasocial chatbots is going to be holding some long meetings over the next few days.

• @richardhanania Richard Hanania on x

  Woman gets $3 million in a jury trial because she says YouTube and Meta made her mentally ill. I'm concerned about kids and social media. But the hostility to personal responsibility and lawlessness of this decision is much worse. https://www.wsj.com/...

• @taylorlorenz Taylor Lorenz on x

  Her mother beat her, abused her, weighed her daily, called her fat, her sister tried to take her own life and her father abandoned her. Yet none of that apparently led to this poor girl's anxiety, depression and body dysmorphia, it was lip gloss review videos on youtube

• @meghanncuniff Meghann Cuniff on x

  The trial is NOT OVER. The jury said YouTube and Meta acted with malice and fraud, so now they have to decide the amount of punitive damages on top of the $3 million in compensatory. Court is back in session at 11 a.m. PST.

• @klonick Kate Klonick on bluesky

  It is really early to tell the significance of this bc it could all be reversed on appeal on both whether the judge's early 1A and 230 decisions were correct (which allowed this to proceed to trial) and then the jury's decision as well.  —  This will likely be years before it is …

• @martylederman Marty Lederman on bluesky

  Serious question: Was this actually YouTube's defense?  “YouTube argued ... that its features were not designed to be addictive.”  (If so, did they think they might have jurors who have never visited YouTube?)  —  www.nytimes.com/2026/03/25/t...

• @repkimschrier Rep. Kim Schrier on bluesky

  This is an important step forward in holding big tech accountable for the harm they are causing young people.  —  apnews.com/article/soci...

• @klonick Kate Klonick on bluesky

  Jury just came back with an additional $3M in punitive damages so grand total of $6M.  —  ~2000 Plaintiffs consolidated on the case are in different situations but even as a bottom number for settlement that puts the loss around $12B just for the California state cases that are c…

• @caseynewton Casey Newton on bluesky

  This verdict seemed very likely the moment that TikTok and Snap settled rather than go to trial.  A landmark moment for Big Tech www.nytimes.com/2026/03/25/t...

• @willoremus.com Will Oremus on bluesky

  Yesterday a jury in New Mexico found that Meta endangered children online.  Today a jury in California found Meta and YouTube negligent for addictive product design.  —  And now: “There are thousands more lawsuits waiting to be heard... ” www.washingtonpost.com/technology/ 2...

• @jamespmcleod.ca James McLeod on bluesky

  This is a big deal; Canada should take notice.  —  Meta and YouTube Found Negligent in Landmark Social Media Addiction Case  —  Jury found them negligent in app designs, harming a young user with design features that were addictive and led to her mental health distress.  —  www.n…

• r/Lawyertalk r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube Found Negligent in Landmark Social Media Addiction Trial (Gift Article)

• r/onguardforthee r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube Found Negligent in Landmark Social Media Addiction Case

• r/news r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube Found Negligent in Landmark Social Media Addiction Trial

• r/technology r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube designed addictive products that harmed young people, jury finds

• r/law r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube Found Negligent in Landmark Social Media Addiction Case

• r/neoliberal r on reddit

  Meta, YouTube found negligent in landmark social media addiction trial

• r/PoliticalOptimism r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube Found Negligent in Landmark Social Media Addiction Case

• r/politics r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube Found Negligent in Landmark Social Media Addiction Case

• @matthewstoller Matt Stoller on x

  @BedoyaUSA “The jury also decided that Meta and Google's actions should trigger punitive damages, which means there will be a separate phase of the trial where the jury will decide what amount of damages are appropriate to punish the multi-trillion-dollar companies for their cond…

• @nicoperrino Nico Perrino on x

  I'm concerned about this verdict and the overall trend of treating speech platforms as addictive — and therefore dangerous — products.  Also, the verdict diminishes the responsibility parents have to raise healthy kids.  For example: “Kaley says she began using YouTube at age 6 a…

• @jason_kint Jason Kint on x

  It doesn't. So stop being concerned. @TaylorLorenz shared this so cc her. It's the product design not the content. That has been and will be instagram and facebook's angle with friends and proxies to try to soften press coverage and parent outrage for harming their children.

• @bedoyausa Alvaro Bedoya on x

  Good flag that $3M may just be the beginning...

• @parismartineau Paris Martineau on x

  this is a huge deal and a sign of the changing legal tides for big tech. the plaintiffs attorneys here were early adopters of a novel legal strategy that uses product liability law to sidestep tech firms' go-to defense (section 230) & hold them accountable for negligent design [i…

• @samadlerbell Sam Adler-Bell on x

  will somebody PLEASE think of the massive monopolistic companies that simply want to make a little profit off the anxieties, self-hatreds, and resentments of their users??

• r/CorpFree r on reddit

  Meta ordered to pay $375 million in New Mexico trial over child exploitation, user safety claims

• r/degoogle r on reddit

  Meta ordered to pay $375 million in New Mexico trial over child exploitation, user safety claims

• r/InterstellarKinetics r on reddit

  BREAKING: A New Mexico Jury Just Ordered Meta To Pay $375 Million After Finding The Company Hid What It Knew About Child Predators On Instagram & Facebook And Lied To The Public About It 🚨

• r/news r on reddit

  Jury orders Meta to pay $375 mln in New Mexico lawsuit over child sexual exploitation, user safety

• @taylorlorenz Taylor Lorenz on x

  Many parents who claim their children were/are “victims” of social media just have LGBTQ kids, autistic kids, and are already making this exact argument sadly: https://www.independent.co.uk/ ...

• @ennuiboy420 @ennuiboy420 on x

  Taylor Lorenz always coming to the defense* of brain rotted phone addicted kids and their tech oligopoly enablers is so funny cuz like girl YOU'RE a victim. You can see that right. Lmao

• @eckhartsladder @eckhartsladder on x

  Taylor Lorenz is consistently on the wrong side of so many issues related to children and technology. A child having a bad home life means that we shouldn't protect them from other dangers or punish those who target them? Insane.

• @sachalouise Sacha Haworth on x

  this is actually not what the verdict says and Taylor knows that. jurors found IG and YT made KGM's existing depression & anxiety worse — and, crucially, that both Meta & Google knew their products did this and didn't change anything. And buried the proof. And lied.

• @moonchilerose @moonchilerose on x

  Can two things not be true at once?

• @chinatowndjake @chinatowndjake on x

  It never ends [image]

• @punishedhoots Hoots Hootman on x

  So, none of this means these platforms aren't addictive. In fact, adolescents with adverse childhood experiences are more susceptible to addictions so it makes sense

• @nnnnnnxox @nnnnnnxox on x

  Stop shilling for big tech, theyre designed specifically to pick up on trauma and insecurities and amplify it. Thats why we are in this mess today

• @matthewstoller Matt Stoller on x

  Meta and Google lawyers had ample time to make their case. They lost for a reason. And smearing a victim like this is ugly, @TaylorLorenz

• @rahmemanuel Rahm Emanuel on x

  Anybody could have seen this coming. Finally Big Tech is being held accountable for the damage it's done to our adolescence. The jury tells you where public opinion is. No time to rest on our laurels. Now it's time to take it to the next step. Congress has to act and ban social

• @usrepkcastor U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor on x

  Meta is being held responsible for putting kids on their platforms in danger 👏🏼 Reminder that Big Tech knows exactly what they're doing, and the Billionaires in charge are trying to stop Congress from regulating them and protecting your kids.

• @jean_twenge Jean Twenge on x

  Sure, the “where are the parents?” argument, because it's so easy to keep kids off social media when age isn't verified, parental permission isn't required, the parental controls in the apps are so hidden and hard to use hardly any parents use them, and kids fear being the only

• @pauljpastor Paul J. Pastor on x

  Strong disagree. These are corporate products first, not speech platforms, and that distinction is vital. The same principles of common/social good that govern environmental pollution can & should be applied here. Parents are vital, but their action is not enough in this case.

• @malinowski Tom Malinowski on x

  Imagine a company was monitoring your child's behavior, deduced she was depressed, then phoned her to say “You might consider suicide, and can we send you some videos about that?” That's how social media algorithms are designed to work. The 1st Amendment does not protect this.

• @nicoperrino Nico Perrino on x

  @jason_kint @TaylorLorenz How you design and display your speech product is an editorial choice integral to the speech itself. How an editor lays out his newspaper or website is an editorial choice. So is adding cliffhangers to the end of TV shows. Those choices are — and should …

• @jillfilipovic Jill Filipovic on x

  I think these are fair concerns but I'm not sure “where are the parents?” matters here. If cigarettes are addictive and dangerous, especially for kids, we don't say, well, put 'em in the candy aisle and let parents do their jobs to make sure kids only have one or two a day.

• @vanceginn Vance Ginn on x

  Empower parents, not politicians.

• @juliecbarrett Julie Barrett on x

  This is a critical point that really must be at the forefront of our discussions about children and the digital world.  Ultimately, parents have the duty and responsibility to protect their children, to enforce boundaries, and to shield their children from the known harms online.…

• @manuelguzman Manuel Guzman on x

  Parents used to set time limits for tv viewing when I was growing up. Letting your 6 year old kid spend all day on YouTube is crazy.

• @astupple Aaron Stupple on x

  Jury finds talking to people is addictive.

• @brihreed Brian Reed on x

  Evidence at this trial put the lie to “it's the parents!” An internal study from @Meta and @UChicago found that parental involvement doesn't curb compulsive social media use - even when parents use Meta's own parental controls. They don't work; Meta knew it; still blamed parents.

• @patterdude Joe Patterson on x

  Social media platforms aren't simply a place for “speech .” That *was* the case with chronological timelines. But now, you see fed information based on an algorithm w the express purpose to keep you on the platform. That's the difference between, say, Signal and TikTok. We've

• r/DiscussionZone r on reddit

  Slap on the wrist?  Meta ordered to pay $375 million in New Mexico trial over child exploitation, user safety claims

• r/NPR r on reddit

  Jury orders Meta and Google to pay woman who compulsively used social media as a small child, awarding her $6 million in social media addiction trial

• @michaelmcgough3 Michael McGough on x

  Worth a read, which is something I don't say about a lot of Wall Street Journal editorials. https://www.wsj.com/...

• @meghanncuniff Meghann Cuniff on x

  I think we may hear about this from the two jurors who said no to every question if they talk to the defense attorneys and the defense files a motion for new trial.

• @tomfitton Tom Fitton on x

  The social-media shakedown is a victory for the plaintiffs bar—not for children or society. https://www.wsj.com/... via @WSJopinion

• @juliaangwin Julia Angwin on x

  The tide is turning. The dollar amount in this lawsuit- $6 million - is low, but the implications are massive. Tech companies are finally being held liable for designing harmful products. My latest for @nytopinion (gift link) on why this win matters. https://www.nytimes.com/...

• @meghanbobrowsky Meghan Bobrowsky on x

  New story from us on what the back-to-back verdicts mean for Meta, ft this interview w/ a juror in the LA case who spoke to @erichschwartzel She said Zuckerberg seemed unprepared during testimony which was surprising for “the guru” whose products were at the center of the case [i…

• r/technology r on reddit

  Do Back-to-Back Courtroom Losses Herald Meta's ‘Big Tobacco’ Moment?

• @astupple Aaron Stupple on x

  Since it's impossible for parents, it's everyone else's job to do it.

• @astupple Aaron Stupple on x

  Like a casino, restaurants manipulate users with carefully designed sounds, smells, and tastes, hijacking users' brains with foods we never encountered in our evolutionary past, all in the name of profit.

• @astupple Aaron Stupple on x

  PSA: Big Tobacco sells a chemical that goes inside your brain and binds receptors that produce a feeling. Social media companies route you to people's speech and drawings that you might be interested in, depending on what you think about what you see and hear.

• @meghanncuniff Meghann Cuniff on x

  Inbox: “With this verdict, New Mexico becomes the first state in the nation to prevail at trial against a major tech company for harming young people. ... The jury found Meta liable for both claims brought by the State of New Mexico under the Unfair Practices Act.” [image]

• @outfrontcnn Erin Burnett OutFront on x

  Former Meta employee says Mark Zuckerberg did not reply to his message about the danger Instagram poses to children, including his own daughter. “The research I did at Instagram found that 1 in 8 kids get unwanted sexual advances. 1 in 5 feel worse about themselves... he didn't […

• @alaneyre1 Alan Eyre on x

  Excellent news. Hopefully the first of many such verdicts. https://www.theguardian.com/ ...

• @meghanncuniff Meghann Cuniff on x

  I discussed the $6 million verdict against Meta and YouTube tonight in the child social media addiction trial. [video]

• @theobertram Theo Bertram on x

  Feels like tipping point on social media & kids. Monday, a longitudinal study from Imperial College London showed children who spent more than 3 hrs a day later suffered increased anxiety & depression, while Meta & YouTube lost ‘addiction by design’ legal case regarding a minor.

• @jeffjarvis@mastodon.social Jeff Jarvis on mastodon

  Can't believe I'm saying this but here's a sensible WSJ editorial.  —  The Social-Media Shakedown Begins  —  https://www.wsj.com/...

• Newsmax Barbara Ortutay on x

  Juries Turn on Big Tech Over Harm to Kids

• @jessefelder.com Jesse Felder on bluesky

  ‘The judgments for threaten to undermine long-held protections that have shielded internet companies for decades, raising the prospect of mass litigation that could stretch for years akin to the legal campaign against the tobacco industry in the 1990s.’ www.wsj.com/tech/do-back..…

• r/worldnews r on reddit

  Meta and YouTube found liable in social media addiction trial

• r/DeMeta r on reddit

  Good news - Jury finds Meta and Google liable in social media addiction trial!