In Los Angeles Superior Court, a pivotal battle unfolds as Meta Platforms Inc. and Alphabet Inc.’s YouTube defend against claims their apps are defective products engineered for addiction. Jury selection began this week in the first bellwether trial of hundreds, pitting a 20-year-old plaintiff known as K.G.M. against the tech behemoths. She alleges that features like infinite scrolling and autoplay hooked her from childhood, fueling depression, anxiety, body dysmorphia, and suicidal thoughts. TikTok and Snap settled on the eve, signaling cracks in Big Tech’s armor. The New York Times detailed how these cases test whether platforms mirror Big Tobacco’s tactics.

Plaintiffs argue social media’s algorithms, notifications, and auto-playing videos create compulsive use akin to casino slots or cigarettes. Internal documents, expected to surface at trial, reportedly show executives aware of harms yet prioritizing engagement for profits. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and YouTube chief Neal Mohan are slated to testify, potentially exposing deliberations on youth safety. “Plaintiffs are not merely the collateral damage of defendants’ products,” the lawsuit asserts, sidestepping Section 230 protections by targeting product design. BBC News noted TikTok’s last-minute settlement hours before jury selection, leaving Meta and YouTube to face jurors.

The Bellwether Stakes

This trial, one of three selected from thousands consolidated in California, could dictate billions in damages or force redesigns. Over 1,600 plaintiffs—including families, school districts, and 40-plus state attorneys general—claim platforms exacerbate a youth mental health crisis. A federal bellwether in Oakland follows in June, representing districts alleging addictive apps disrupt classrooms. Success here might compel warning labels or age gates, echoing global moves like Australia’s under-16 ban. Los Angeles Times quoted Sacha Haworth of Tech Oversight Project: “This is the beginning of the trial of our generation.”

Former White House Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra, speaking on CNBC’s Squawk Box, called the proceedings a “blunt instrument to bring accountability.” Chopra, who served under President Obama, highlighted lawsuits against Meta and Alphabet over Instagram and YouTube’s designs for young users. Platforms counter that addiction lacks clinical status, parental oversight matters, and studies show mixed links to mental health woes. Google anticipates a six-to-eight-week ordeal, per CNBC.

Design Features Under Fire

Attorneys for K.G.M. liken infinite scroll to slot machines, autoplay to one-click betting, and recommendations to personalized dopamine hits. Plaintiffs’ lawyer Mark Lanier seeks “transparency,” aiming to unseal records proving companies “orchestrated an addiction crisis.” Jurors may view whistleblower testimony, like ex-Meta execs revealing ignored pleas for teen protections. Defendants insist features aid discovery, not compulsion, and no causation exists for harms like eating disorders or self-harm. NBC News reported Lanier’s push for public records.

Eric Goldman, Santa Clara University law professor, warned to BBC News that losses pose “existential threat” to firms, opening floods of claims bypassing content-liability shields. Plaintiffs’ counsel Matthew Bergman added: “There are all too many kids… suffering… because of the dangerous and addictive algorithms.” Snap’s prior settlement and TikTok’s confidential deal underscore mounting pressure, though terms remain sealed.

Broader Legal Fronts

Beyond individuals, school districts sue over distracted students and rising counseling needs. New York City targeted Meta, Google, Snap, and TikTok in October for fueling youth issues. States like Iowa advance suits post-Supreme Court nods. Internationally, France and the UK eye bans for under-15s and -16s. Reuters confirmed TikTok’s exit, with Meta and YouTube pressing on.

Research divides experts: Surgeon General Vivek Murthy urged warning labels in 2024, citing adolescent harms. Yet platforms cite studies showing benefits like connection, blaming family dynamics or broader societal shifts. Neama Rahmani, ex-prosecutor, told NBC Montana causation proves tough amid confounders like peers or home life. As of January 2026, the multidistrict litigation holds 2,243 cases, per Lawsuit Information Center.

Execs in the Dock

Zuckerberg’s testimony looms large; plaintiffs eye his 2024 Senate grilling on child safety. YouTube’s Mohan may defend recommendations as educational. Internal memos, if admitted, could reveal fears of tobacco parallels. Lead counsel Joseph VanZandt hailed TikTok’s deal as a “good resolution,” refocusing on remaining foes. Platforms vow vigorous defense, arguing user agency and tools like screen limits suffice. CBS News previewed the jury’s role in reshaping apps.

For industry insiders, outcomes hinge on proving design defects caused specific injuries. A win mandates changes; losses invite settlements topping billions. Chopra’s “blunt instrument” label captures the crude force of juries versus regulators. As trials cascade, tech’s youth model faces existential scrutiny, potentially birthing a new liability era. CNBC Squawk Box featured Chopra’s take amid unfolding drama.

Global Ripples and Reforms

France’s under-15 ban, Australia’s under-16 law, and UK’s deliberations signal worldwide backlash. U.S. cases borrow tobacco strategies: hide harms, addict vulnerable, deny science. If juries buy it, expect age verification, slowed feeds, or payout funds. Firms already tweak: Instagram’s teen accounts, YouTube’s limits. Yet plaintiffs demand root fixes. Clay Calvert of American Enterprise Institute called it a “test case” for harm theories, per The Guardian.