Link: https://www.theguardian.com/media/ng-interactive/2026/mar/28/week-that-brought-big-tech-to-heel-meta-youtube-google-instagram-facebook

The young woman at the heart of what has been called the tech industry’s “big tobacco” moment was on YouTube at six and Instagram by nine. More than a decade later, she says, she still can’t live without the social media she became addicted to.

“I can’t, it’s too hard to be without it,” Kaley, now 20, told a jury at Los Angeles’ superior court. This week, five men and seven women handed down a verdict on the design of two of the world’s most popular apps that vindicated Kaley’s position.

The ruling sent shockwaves through Silicon Valley and sparked hope among families and child safety campaigners that change may finally be coming to social media. Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta and Google’s YouTube were found liable for deliberately designing addictive products used by Kaley and millions of other young people.

It was one case centred on the suffering of one young person who became depressed at 10 and self-harmed, but Kaley, referred to by her first name or the initials KGM in order to protect her privacy, was the figurehead for a much bigger fight.

“We wanted them to feel it,” one of the jurors explained to reporters. “We wanted them to realise this was unacceptable.”

Doesn't this just sound like what they want from all this anyhow? A reason to implement 'age verification'

I would be hopeful if this wasn't up to the US justice system

I don't think that's what the parents or kids want, but I do think that'll be what happens, yes.

Don’t let this become a “protect the kids” thing. The intentionally addictive and manipulative design of these platforms has been just as harmful to people across a wide spectrum of ages. The solution is not to ban kids from using these platforms, the solution is to hold these platforms accountable for their behavior and put regulations in to ban intentionally manipulative design. Adults are just as much victims of having their brains cooked by this shit, and it’s had larger scale societal consequences that we need to take seriously.

ordered to pay $375m by a New Mexico court.

Meta total assets: US$366 billion (2025)... with a fucking B

I'm sorry, which big tech company is brought to who's heel?

As I understand it there are dozens of similar cases already started. The precedent is what's meaningful

I think we're still waiting to learn whether he did, or not, though.

That is $375M to a single person. This wasn’t a class action. This was a precedent-setting case that opens the floodgates for future lawsuits. Until now, actually getting courts to agree with plaintiffs has been impossible. But since courts use precedent, this allows future plaintiffs to refer to it when filing their own lawsuits.

Not sure this is what social media wants. They want to maximize shareholder value. The teen segment is crazy valuable since a lot of them are able to convince parents to buy them all kinds of shit. Without this segment, advertisers will turn to other platforms and thus remove lots of ad money from these platforms

I guess I should clarify I'm referring to the corporate overlord illuminati 'they', not the victims of the aforementioned conspitators 'they'

Agreed, unfortunately I think this will only fuel further age and ID verification enforcements. And of course change nothing in the design of the platforms.

https://nmdoj.gov/press-release/new-mexico-department-of-justice-wins-landmark-verdict-against-meta/

Not a lawyer, but doesn't this mean it was the state the sued and won, and not a private citizen..?

"US Justice" system exists like the tooth fairy exists. We have a legal system, not a justice system, and it's working exactly as intended.

I'll believe they were "brought to heel" if I see change.

Doubt.

That is $375M to a single person.

Wrong, this was state-initiated consumer protection enforcement action by the state of New Mexico. How those funds get distributed is up to the state government.

The article highlights how the UK is moving to ban infinite scrolling access autoplay videos. So, thankfully, those changes are coming in at least some jurisdictions.

That said, the article also helpfully points out that the Republican administration has stuffed their science & tech advisory panel with Meta and Google execs, so I'm doubtful that the US will regulate anything reasonable.

I'd like a ban in effect for children below 16, but enforcement should be a misdemeanor on the parent. It should be a social worker coming to discuss with the parents the known harms of the platforms and let them get away with a warning, but that there will be fines if this damaging behaviour continues with an automatic 1-year (or whatever) follow-up. Basically, treat it the way it's treated if parents are giving cigarettes to their children.

Wtf is up with the Guardian lately and these headlines? Not as bad as the "slams" or "politician did this one thing slop" but getting there. I digress...

They are invincible. That fine is a pittance. Thats a get out of jail free card.

Wtf is up with the Guardian lately and these headlines?

I was just thinking the same thing! Might be filler articles used for shitposts, maybe by someone in their organization.

I just read one about a "possible" UK shortage in certain prescription medicines. The actual meat of the article was a guy saying "The supply chain is disrupted and we need alternate means of delivery." Yes, thank you Captain Obvious. It's is the same for basically EVERY imported product that comes by sea right now. They could write the same article for dozens of different industries. They're all impacted the same way. Hush, Guardian, hush.