- TikTok and Snap have reached settlements in a key social media addiction lawsuit ahead of trial.
- Meta and Instagram, along with YouTube, are now facing a process on their own that could affect thousands of similar cases.
- The plaintiff, KGM, 19, claims that the design of the platforms hooked her from childhood and severely affected her mental health.
- The trial in Los Angeles is already being compared to the major trials against the tobacco industry and could influence future regulations to protect minors, including in Europe.
A last-minute agreement has once again put Big Tech in the spotlight: TikTok has decided to settle a key social media addiction lawsuit out of court , just as a landmark trial was about to begin in California, in which Meta and Instagram, along with YouTube, will also continue. Although the case is taking place in the United States , the discussion about the impact of these platforms on young people's mental health is also resonating strongly in Europe and Spain , where stricter regulations are being prepared.
The lawsuit, filed by a 19-year-old woman identified as KGM , accuses several social media platforms of designing their products to be highly addictive for children and teenagers. TikTok and Snap (Snapchat's parent company) have opted for a settlement before going to trial, while Meta (Facebook and Instagram) and YouTube will face a trial that is considered a true test for the hundreds of similar cases already looming in court.
A TikTok deal on the verge of trial
According to the plaintiff's lawyers, TikTok reached an agreement "in principle" with KGM on the same day jury selection was scheduled to begin in Los Angeles. The financial details and any additional obligations the Chinese company may assume have not been made public, and the company has remained silent in response to requests for information.
This move comes on the heels of a similar agreement reached days earlier by Snap Inc., owner of Snapchat , which had already reached a confidential settlement with the same plaintiff . Neither party has specified whether these agreements include changes to the apps' features, commitments to less addictive design, or solely financial compensation.
Meta Platforms and Google (through YouTube) , however, are proceeding alone. The trial will continue exclusively against these two companies, even though the case originated as a joint lawsuit against four major social media platforms, all accused of fueling a youth mental health crisis through mechanisms designed to hold children's attention for as long as possible.
The partial settlement with TikTok does not close the legal front for the company: the plaintiffs' lawyers point out that the platform is still involved in other personal injury proceedings related to the intensive use of social media, some of them in states where lawsuits have also been filed against Meta for similar reasons.
The KGM case: a pilot lawsuit that could set a precedent
At the heart of it all is the story of KGM, a 19-year-old Californian who began using social media as a child. In her lawsuit, she argues that the design of apps like TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, and YouTube exposed her from a very young age to a constant stream of content that was difficult to escape , leading to a genuine technological dependency.
The young woman links this compulsive use to a progressive worsening of her depression and the emergence of suicidal thoughts . In her opinion, it's not just about the content visible on the platforms, but a network of conscious design decisions made by companies to maximize the connection time of particularly vulnerable users, such as minors.
His is one of three pilot trials, or "bellwether trials," selected from hundreds of lawsuits filed in the United States by families and, in some cases, by school districts. These test cases serve to assess before a jury how each side's arguments hold up and what the potential compensation amounts could be, which often informs possible global settlements or regulatory changes.
For tech companies, the risk is no less: these oral hearings will be the first time they have to defend before a jury the core of their business model , based on algorithms that recommend content and interaction systems designed to keep the user hooked.
Technology law experts see parallels with the mega-trials against the tobacco industry , which resulted in major financial settlements and restrictions on advertising, especially that aimed at young people. While the situations are not entirely comparable, an unfavorable outcome could pave the way for similar large-scale negotiations with social media companies.
A supposedly addictive design: from infinite scrolling to algorithms
The prosecution argues that the platforms are not neutral and have adopted technical design principles inspired by industries such as gambling and tobacco to capture the attention of young people. The documents submitted to the court cite specific features: autoplay videos, infinite scrolling, constant notifications, and social rewards in the form of likes, comments, and views.
According to the lawsuit, these functions rely on behavioral and neurobiological techniques similar to those used by slot machines , designed to create patterns of repetitive use that are difficult to break. All of this has a clear objective: to increase the time users spend on the platform in order to boost revenue from targeted advertising.
The legal documents go further, describing young users not as collateral damage, but as “direct victims” of deliberate design decisions . The plaintiffs argue that the companies configured their products knowing they could push minors into self-destructive feedback loops , where the need to stay connected is combined with content potentially harmful to their self-esteem or mental health.
This legal approach seeks to circumvent one of the tech companies' biggest defenses: the protection of freedom of expression and the well-known Section 230 of US law, which limits their liability for content generated by third parties. KGM's lawyers are trying to focus not on what other users publish, but on how the product itself is designed to attract, segment, and bombard increasingly younger users with stimuli.
Meanwhile, the prosecution emphasizes that the alleged addiction was exacerbated by the lack of effective age verification , the limited transparency of the algorithms, and the ease with which a minor can spend hours online with virtually no interference. This debate is not unique to Europe, where regulations such as the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the forthcoming Artificial Intelligence Regulation are beginning to hold platforms more accountable for the design of their systems. In fact, stricter age verification and measures to protect minors are being considered in Europe.
The defense of Meta, YouTube, and the rest of the tech companies
The companies involved have closed ranks and flatly deny having designed products to harm minors . Meta, owner of Facebook and Instagram, has insisted in recent statements that blaming social media for teenagers' mental health problems is, in its words, "an oversimplification of a profoundly complex phenomenon . "
Mark Zuckerberg's company maintains that youth mental health is influenced by multiple factors , from academic pressure and families' economic situations to safety in schools and substance use. In this context, Meta argues that its platforms can also have positive effects in terms of social connection and peer support, and insists that it has incorporated numerous tools over the years to manage screen time, limit sensitive content, and strengthen parental controls.
A company spokesperson reiterated that Meta does not share the allegations and is confident that the evidence presented in court demonstrates its “long-term commitment to supporting young people.” Among the measures they cite are parental verification and monitoring systems , warning screens before certain content, and algorithms that attempt to reduce continued exposure to potentially harmful material.
Google, through its spokesperson José Castañeda, has dismissed the accusations against YouTube as "simply false ." The company emphasizes that it has been adjusting its product for minors for years, with features like YouTube Kids, time limits, the default deactivation of certain functions for teenage users, and a specific policy on inappropriate content.
TikTok, while not disclosing details of its agreement with KGM, has repeatedly defended its screen time controls, restricted modes for minors, and educational tools for families . Despite this, the platform continues to face similar legal proceedings in several countries and is under scrutiny by authorities in European nations, who are investigating whether its practices comply with data protection and child safety regulations.
A trial with global reach and repercussions in Europe and Spain
Although the trial is taking place in the Los Angeles County Superior Court , the impact of what happens in this courtroom could be felt thousands of miles away. The trial, expected to last between six and eight weeks , begins with jury selection, and approximately 75 people will be questioned each day. It will be the first time that Meta and Instagram, along with YouTube, have had to explain to ordinary citizens how they design and manage their platforms when the user is a minor.
Technology watchdog organizations like Tech Oversight Project point out that this is “just the first case” in a wave of lawsuits from parents and schools blaming Big Tech for concrete harm to children’s mental health. In addition, more than 40 state attorneys general have sued Meta for allegedly contributing to the youth mental health crisis, largely through features designed to increase daily use of Instagram and Facebook.
Meanwhile, other lawsuits in the United States are focusing on failures to protect minors from sexual exploitation on social media, questioning not only the content itself, but also the role of algorithms in amplifying or recommending harmful material. All of this is fueling the political and social debate about the extent of a platform's responsibility regarding the effects of its product on children.
In Europe, these discussions align with the current regulatory agenda. The European Union has approved the DSA, the Digital Services Regulation , which requires large intermediaries to assess and mitigate systemic risks, including impacts on children's mental health and rights . Furthermore, several countries, including Spain, are exploring ways to limit children's access to social media , strengthen age verification requirements, and mandate less intrusive designs.
For the platforms, a ruling that interprets the very design of their systems as potentially giving rise to civil liability opens a delicate scenario. Beyond compensation, it would raise the possibility of a shift in the way recommendation features, content loops, and notifications are built , with direct effects on their advertising business and international strategy, including in the European market.
Schools, families, and next steps in court
The KGM case is just one piece of an increasingly crowded legal map . In the coming months, a federal trial is scheduled to begin in Oakland, also in California, brought by school districts that claim they have had to dedicate more resources to behavioral problems, absenteeism, and mental health issues linked, according to them, to students' excessive use of social media.
These demands are complemented by the work of parent groups calling for stronger measures, such as banning smartphones in classrooms or imposing clear age and usage limits. Groups like Mothers Against Media Addiction denounce what they consider an influence strategy by Big Tech , which includes public relations campaigns, family workshops, and collaborations with parent associations and youth organizations.
The companies, for their part, highlighted digital education and well-being initiatives they have funded in recent years: workshops like “Screen Smart” run by Meta in schools, TikTok programs focused on online kindness and screen time management, and Google's activities with youth organizations to teach internet safety. These initiatives also include specific programs, such as the psychological support button in Peru launched by the platform in collaboration with health authorities.
Underlying this is an issue that is also a concern in Spain and other European countries: the lack of a clear scientific consensus on the extent to which social media use causes or exacerbates psychological problems in adolescents. While some studies point to worrying correlations, others indicate that the impact depends heavily on the type of use, the family context, and pre-existing vulnerability factors.
In this context, the trial against Meta and YouTube, following the settlements with TikTok and Snap, is seen as a barometer of how the legal liability of these platforms might evolve . What is presented and documented in this Los Angeles courtroom will fuel the regulatory debate in the United States, but will also serve as a reference point for legislators and courts in Europe when deciding whether or not to demand profound changes in the design of the social networks used daily by millions of minors.
Everything that has happened surrounding KGM's lawsuit paints a picture in which TikTok and Snap have preferred to resolve things discreetly, while Meta and YouTube prepare for an unprecedented public examination of how they have built their platforms to engage minors. The outcome of this trial, coupled with the numerous pending cases in the United States and regulatory pressure in Europe, could become the turning point that forces major social networks to thoroughly rethink how they balance their business model with the real protection of children's and adolescents' mental health.
