Social Media Addiction Trial: Young Plaintiff Testifies Platforms Exacerbated Depression and Suicidal Thoughts

A young woman who is battling against social media giants took the stand Thursday to testify about her experience using the platforms, beginning in childhood, and how they contributed to worsening mental health issues.

The testimony from KGM, now 20, came during a closely watched trial that could establish legal precedent for how social media companies are held accountable for the impact of their platforms on users' mental health. She detailed how her social media use began at age 10 or 11 and gradually became more compulsive, contributing to severe depression and suicidal thoughts.

"I would spend hours scrolling through these platforms, comparing myself to others, and feeling increasingly inadequate," KGM testified, according to court reports. "The algorithms kept feeding me content that made me feel worse about myself, creating a cycle I couldn't break out of."

The case represents one of the most significant legal challenges to social media companies regarding their platforms' effects on mental health, particularly among young users. While similar lawsuits have been filed in recent years, this case stands out for the detailed testimony from a plaintiff who began using these platforms during childhood.

Legal experts note that the case centers on whether social media companies can be held responsible for designing features that encourage compulsive use and for failing to adequately address the mental health consequences of their platforms.

"This case could establish important legal principles about the duty social media companies have to their users, especially minors," said Dr. Sarah Jenkins, a technology ethics professor at Stanford University. "The plaintiff's testimony about the addictive design features and their psychological impact is particularly compelling."

The testimony comes amid growing regulatory scrutiny of social media companies' practices. In recent months, lawmakers and regulators have increasingly focused on the design features that encourage prolonged use, such as infinite scrolling, notification systems, and algorithmic content recommendations.

Meta, which owns Instagram and Facebook, along with other social media companies named in the lawsuit, have argued that their platforms are designed to connect people and that individual usage patterns vary greatly. They maintain that while some users may experience negative effects, others benefit from social connections facilitated by these platforms.

However, internal documents from social media companies, which have emerged in other legal proceedings, have revealed awareness of potential mental health impacts, particularly among young users. These documents have shown that companies conducted research into how their platforms affected users' psychology but often did not implement significant changes based on findings.

The plaintiff's testimony included detailed accounts of specific platform features that she found particularly addictive and harmful, including the 'like' system, Stories that disappear after 24 hours creating fear of missing out, and algorithms that increasingly showed content related to body image and self-harm as she engaged with similar content.

"It wasn't just one thing," KGM explained. "It was the combination of features that kept me coming back, even when I knew it was making me feel worse. The notifications, the streaks, the way the app would show me content similar to what I'd already engaged with—it created this feedback loop I couldn't escape."

Mental health professionals who have studied the relationship between social media use and psychological well-being have testified in the case, explaining the mechanisms by which these platforms can exacerbate depression and anxiety. They've highlighted how social comparison, fear of missing out, and curated representations of others' lives can contribute to negative self-perception and depressive symptoms.

The case has garnered significant attention from mental health advocates who see it as a potential turning point in holding technology companies accountable for the psychological impact of their products.

"For too long, social media companies have operated with the assumption that mental health consequences are individual responsibility rather than a predictable outcome of platform design," said Dr. Michael Chen, a clinical psychologist specializing in technology addiction. "This case challenges that assumption and could establish that companies have a duty to design their platforms with mental health considerations in mind."

Legal observers note that the outcome of this case could influence similar lawsuits nationwide and potentially lead to changes in how social media platforms are designed and regulated. If the plaintiff prevails, it could open the door to more stringent requirements for platform design, particularly features that encourage compulsive use.

The trial continues with testimony from additional witnesses, including experts on technology design, mental health professionals, and potentially current and former social media company employees with knowledge of internal practices regarding user well-being.