Parents and advocacy groups pushing for stricter social media regulations have welcomed a landmark decision by a Los Angeles jury, which ruled in favor of a young woman who accused tech giants Meta and YouTube of contributing to her childhood addiction.

The jury concluded that Meta—owner of Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp—and Google, which owns YouTube, deliberately designed platforms that foster addictive behavior and negatively impacted the mental health of the now 20-year-old plaintiff, identified as Kaley.

Kaley was awarded $6 million (£4.5 million) in damages. The verdict is expected to influence numerous similar lawsuits currently progressing through courts across the United States.

Both Meta and Google have expressed disagreement with the ruling and confirmed plans to appeal.

Meta said: "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 record of protecting teens online."

A spokesperson for Google said: "This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site."

However, Ellen Roome, who is pursuing legal action against TikTok following her son’s death, described the verdict as a turning point. "How many more children are going to be harmed and potentially die from these platforms?" she asked.

"It's been proved it's not safe - and social media companies need to fix it."

Jurors awarded Kaley $3 million in compensatory damages and an additional $3 million in punitive damages, determining that Meta and Google "acted with malice, oppression, or fraud" in operating their platforms.

Under the ruling, Meta is responsible for 70% of the damages, while Google will cover the remaining 30%.

Outside the courthouse, parents of other affected children gathered throughout the five-week trial. When the verdict was announced, many, including Amy Neville, celebrated and embraced supporters.

The decision follows another ruling in New Mexico, where a jury found Meta liable for exposing children to harmful and explicit content, including interactions with sexual predators.

Industry analyst Mike Proulx from Forrester described the consecutive rulings as a "breaking point" in public trust toward social media companies.

Governments worldwide have begun responding. Countries like Australia have introduced measures to restrict children's access to social media, while the UK is testing a potential ban for users under 16.

"Negative sentiment toward social media has been building for years, and now it's finally boiled over," Proulx said.

Reacting to the verdict, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer stated that the current situation is "not good enough" and emphasized the need for stronger protections for children.

" It's not if things are going to change, things are going to change.

The question is, how much and what are we going to do?"

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, long-time advocates for online safety, called the ruling a "reckoning."

"Let this be the change – where our children's safety is finally prioritised above profit."

British campaigner Ian Russell also highlighted the significance of the case, saying: "There is a big hope that this is a big moment and tech will... [need] to change, but only if the governments do something about it."

During testimony, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg pointed to company policies prohibiting users under 13. However, when confronted with internal evidence showing younger users were active on the platform, he said he "always wished" for quicker progress in identifying them and maintained the company had reached the "right place over time."

Although Google was named in the lawsuit, much of the trial focused on Instagram and Meta’s practices. Snap and TikTok, initially part of the case, reached confidential settlements before the trial began.

Kaley’s legal team argued that the platforms functioned as "addiction machines" and failed to adequately prevent children from accessing them.

Kaley testified that she began using YouTube at age six and Instagram at nine, without any effective age restrictions. She described withdrawing from family interactions due to excessive time spent online.

"I stopped engaging with family because I was spending all my time on social media," she said.

She also shared that she began experiencing anxiety and depression at age 10, later diagnosed by a therapist. Additionally, she developed concerns about her appearance, frequently using filters that altered her facial features.

Kaley has since been diagnosed with body dysmorphia, a condition that distorts self-perception of appearance.

Her lawyers argued that features like infinite scrolling were intentionally designed to keep users engaged, particularly younger audiences, to support long-term platform growth.

When questioned about Kaley’s reported 16-hour usage in a single day, Instagram head Adam Mosseri rejected the notion that it proved addiction, instead calling such behavior "problematic."

Following the verdict, Kaley’s legal team stated that the decision "sends an unmistakable message that no company is above accountability when it comes to our children."

Another major lawsuit addressing alleged harms caused by social media platforms is set to begin in California federal court in June.