Social Media ‘Addicting the Brains of Children,’ Plaintiff’s Lawyer Argues in Landmark Trial

Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)
Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

Social Media ‘Addicting the Brains of Children,’ Plaintiff’s Lawyer Argues in Landmark Trial

Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)
Teenagers pose for a photo while holding smartphones in front of a Meta logo in this illustration taken September 11, 2025. (Reuters)

Comparing social media platforms to casinos and addictive drugs, lawyer Mark Lanier delivered opening statements Monday in a landmark trial in Los Angeles that seeks to hold Instagram owner Meta and Google's YouTube responsible for harms to children who use their products.

Instagram's parent company Meta and Google's YouTube face claims that their platforms addict children through deliberate design choices that keep kids glued to their screens. TikTok and Snap, which were originally named in the lawsuit, settled for undisclosed sums.

Jurors got their first glimpse into what will be a lengthy trial characterized by dueling narratives from the plaintiffs and the two remaining defendants.

Meta lawyer Paul Schmidt spoke of the disagreement within the scientific community over social media addiction, with some researchers believing it doesn’t exist, or that addiction is not the most appropriate way to describe heavy social media use.

‘Addicting the brains of children’

Lanier, the plaintiff's lawyer, delivered lively first remarks where he said the case will be as “easy as ABC” — which stands for “addicting the brains of children.” He said Meta and Google, “two of the richest corporations in history,” have “engineered addiction in children’s brains.”

He presented jurors with a slew of internal emails, documents and studies conducted by Meta and YouTube, as well as YouTube’s parent company, Google. He emphasized the findings of a study Meta conducted called “Project Myst” in which they surveyed 1,000 teens and their parents about their social media use.

The two major findings, Lanier said, were that Meta knew children who experienced “adverse events” like trauma and stress were particularly vulnerable for addiction; and that parental supervision and controls made little impact.

He also highlighted internal Google documents that likened some company products to a casino, and internal communication between Meta employees in which one person said Instagram is “like a drug” and they are “basically pushers.”

At the core of the Los Angeles case is a 20-year-old identified only by the initials “KGM,” whose case could determine how thousands of other, similar lawsuits against social media companies will play out. She and two other plaintiffs have been selected for bellwether trials — essentially test cases for both sides to see how their arguments play out before a jury.

Plaintiff grew up using YouTube, Instagram

KGM made a brief appearance after a break during Lanier’s statement and she will return to testify later in the trial. Lanier spent time describing KGM's childhood, focusing particularly on what her personality was like before she began using social media.

She started using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 9, Lanier said. Before she graduated elementary school, she had posted 284 videos on YouTube.

The outcome of the trial could have profound effects on the companies' businesses and how they will handle children using their platforms.

Lanier said the companies’ lawyers will “try to blame the little girl and her parents for the trap they built,” referencing the plaintiff. She was a minor when she said she became addicted to social media, which she claims had a detrimental impact on her mental health.

Lanier said that despite the public position of Meta and YouTube being that they work to protect children, their internal documents show an entirely different position, with explicit references to young children being listed as their target audiences.

The attorney also drew comparisons between the social media companies and tobacco firms, citing internal communication between Meta employees who were concerned about the company’s lack of proactive action about the potential harm their platforms can have on children and teens.

“For a teenager, social validation is survival,” Lanier said. The defendants “engineered a feature that caters to a minor’s craving for social validation,” he added, speaking about “like” buttons and similar features.

Meta pushes back

In his opening statement representing Meta, Schmidt said the core question in the case is whether the platforms were a substantial factor in KGM’s mental health struggles. He spent much of his time going through the plaintiff’s health records, emphasizing that she had experienced many difficult circumstances in her childhood, including emotional abuse, body image issues and bullying.

Schmidt presented a clip from a video deposition from one of KGM‘s mental health providers, Dr. Thomas Suberman, who said social media was “not the through-line of what I recall being her main issues,” adding that her struggles seemed to largely stem from interpersonal conflicts and relationships.

He painted a picture — with KGM’s own text messages and testimony pointing to a volatile home life — of a particularly troubled relationship with her mother.

Schmidt acknowledged that many mental health professionals do believe social media addiction can exist, but said three of KGM’s providers — all of whom believe in the form of addiction — have never diagnosed her with it, or treated her for it.

Schmidt stressed to the jurors that the case is not about whether social media is a good thing or whether teens spend too much time on their phones or whether the jurors like or dislike Meta, but whether social media was a substantial factor in KGM’s mental health struggles.

A reckoning for social media and youth harms

A slew of trials beginning this year seek to hold social media companies responsible for harming children's mental well-being. Executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, are expected to testify at the Los Angeles trial, which will last six to eight weeks.

Experts have drawn similarities to the Big Tobacco trials that led to a 1998 settlement requiring cigarette companies to pay billions in health care costs and restrict marketing targeting minors.

A separate trial in New Mexico, meanwhile, also kicked off with opening statements on Monday. In that trial, Meta is accused of failing to protect young users from sexual exploitation, following an undercover online investigation. Attorney General Raúl Torrez in late 2023 sued Meta and Zuckerberg, who was later dropped from the suit.

A federal bellwether trial beginning in June in Oakland, California, will be the first to represent school districts that have sued social media platforms over harms to children.

In addition, more than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, claiming it is harming young people and contributing to the youth mental health crisis by deliberately designing features on Instagram and Facebook that addict children to its platforms. The majority of cases filed their lawsuits in federal court, but some sued in their respective states.

TikTok also faces similar lawsuits in more than a dozen states.



Billionaire Elon Musk Enters Courtroom Showdown with OpenAI

Elon Musk arrives at the 10th Breakthrough Prize Ceremony on April 13, 2024, at the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures in Los Angeles. (AP)
Elon Musk arrives at the 10th Breakthrough Prize Ceremony on April 13, 2024, at the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures in Los Angeles. (AP)
TT

Billionaire Elon Musk Enters Courtroom Showdown with OpenAI

Elon Musk arrives at the 10th Breakthrough Prize Ceremony on April 13, 2024, at the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures in Los Angeles. (AP)
Elon Musk arrives at the 10th Breakthrough Prize Ceremony on April 13, 2024, at the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures in Los Angeles. (AP)

Jury selection is to begin Monday in a high-profile legal battle between billionaire Elon Musk and artificial intelligence startup OpenAI, which he accuses of betraying its non-profit mission.

The clash in a courtroom across the bay from San Francisco pits the world's richest man against a startup that Musk once backed and now competes against in the booming AI sector.

OpenAI's ChatGPT is a formidable rival to the Grok chatbot made by Musk's xAI lab.

While the lawsuit filed by Musk is part of a feud between him and OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman, it spotlights a debate whether AI should ultimately benefit the privileged few or society as a whole.

Court filings lay out how Altman tried to convince Musk to back OpenAI in 2015, acting as a co-founder for a non-profit lab whose technology "would belong to the world."

Musk pumped some $38 million into the lab before he left.

OpenAI is now valued at $852 billion, with Microsoft among its backers, and is preparing to go public on the stock market.

The judge presiding over the trial is aiming for a jury to decide by late May whether OpenAI broke a promise to Musk in its drive to be a leader in AI or just smartly rode the technology to glory.

- Musk duped? -

Musk argues in his lawsuit that he was deceived about OpenAI's mission being altruistic.

The tycoon cites an email from Altman in 2017 claiming that he remained "enthusiastic about the non-profit structure" of their AI venture after Musk threatened to cut off funding for the lab.

Just a few months later, however, OpenAI established a commercial subsidiary in the face of needing to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in data centers to power its technology.

Over the course of the following two years, Microsoft pumped billions of dollars into OpenAI and the tech stalwart's stake in the startup is now valued about $135 billion.

Microsoft chief executive Satya Nadella is among those slated to testify at the trial.

- Aimed at Altman -

Along with calling for OpenAI to be forced to revert to a pure nonprofit, Musk's suit urges the ousting of Altman and OpenAI co-founder and president Greg Brockman.

Musk is also seeking as much as $134 billion in damages and to have the court make OpenAI sever ties with Microsoft.

During pre-trial hearings, US Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers mused that Musk team seemed to be "pulling numbers out of the air" when it came to calculating damages.

If the jury sides with Musk, it will be left to Rogers to determine any remedies or payment.

In what OpenAI has dismissed as a public relations stunt, Musk has vowed that any damages awarded in the suit will go to the startup's nonprofit foundation.

- Quest for control? -

OpenAI internal communications brought to light by the lawsuit reveal tensions that culminated with the temporary ouster of Altman as AI chief executive in late 2023.

Musk's legal team highlighted a 2017 entry in Brockman's personal journal reasoning that it would be lying if Altman publicly asserted OpenAI would stay a nonprofit but became a corporation a short time later.

OpenAI now has a hybrid governance structure giving its nonprofit foundation control over a for-profit arm.

In court filings, OpenAI countered that its break-up with Musk was due to his quest for absolute control rather than its nonprofit status.

"This case has always been about Elon generating more power and more money for what he wants," OpenAI said in a post on X, a platform Musk owns.

"His lawsuit remains nothing more than a harassment campaign that's driven by ego, jealousy and a desire to slow down a competitor."

The startup noted that days after Musk entered the AI race in 2023 he called for a 6-month moratorium on development of advanced AI.


SDAIA Showcases Saudi Arabia’s AI Governance Model at UN Session in Geneva

The Saudi Authority for Data and Artificial Intelligence (SDAIA)
The Saudi Authority for Data and Artificial Intelligence (SDAIA)
TT

SDAIA Showcases Saudi Arabia’s AI Governance Model at UN Session in Geneva

The Saudi Authority for Data and Artificial Intelligence (SDAIA)
The Saudi Authority for Data and Artificial Intelligence (SDAIA)

The Saudi Data and Artificial Intelligence Authority (SDAIA) participated in the 29th session of the United Nations Commission on Science and Technology for Development, held in Geneva from April 20 to 24. Under the theme "Science, Technology, and Innovation in the Age of AI," the session gathered global representatives from governments, international organizations, and the private sector.

During the summit, SDAIA presented the Saudi model for regulating and developing the AI sector, highlighting the Kingdom's leadership in data governance and the creation of reliable AI systems. SDAIA emphasized Saudi Arabia's active role in shaping international governance frameworks and its commitment to utilizing AI to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 2030.

Coinciding with the Year of AI 2026, this participation reinforces the Kingdom’s position as a global hub for emerging technologies.

By sharing national expertise and expanding international cooperation, SDAIA continues to support the adoption of responsible AI practices, aligning with Saudi Vision 2030 to build an integrated national system driven by data and innovation.


China's DeepSeek Releases Long-awaited New AI Model

A man takes photos of a DeepSeek display at a shopping mall in Hangzhou, in China's eastern Zhejiang province on April 23, 2026. (Photo by CN-STR / AFP)
A man takes photos of a DeepSeek display at a shopping mall in Hangzhou, in China's eastern Zhejiang province on April 23, 2026. (Photo by CN-STR / AFP)
TT

China's DeepSeek Releases Long-awaited New AI Model

A man takes photos of a DeepSeek display at a shopping mall in Hangzhou, in China's eastern Zhejiang province on April 23, 2026. (Photo by CN-STR / AFP)
A man takes photos of a DeepSeek display at a shopping mall in Hangzhou, in China's eastern Zhejiang province on April 23, 2026. (Photo by CN-STR / AFP)

Chinese startup DeepSeek released a new artificial intelligence model with "drastically reduced" costs Friday, more than a year after it stunned the world with a low-cost reasoning model that matched the capabilities of US rivals.

The AI race has intensified the rivalry between China and the United States, with the White House on Thursday accusing Chinese entities of a massive effort to steal artificial intelligence technology. Beijing called the claim "baseless".

Hangzhou-based DeepSeek burst onto the scene in January last year with a generative AI chatbot, powered by its R1 reasoning model, that upended assumptions of US dominance in the strategic sector.

DeepSeek-V4 "features an ultra-long context", the company said in a statement on social media platform WeChat, hailing it as "world-leading... with drastically reduced compute (and) memory costs" in a separate announcement on X.

V4 supports a context length of one million "tokens" -- small components of text including words or punctuation -- putting it on par with Google's Gemini.

Context length determines how much input a model is able to absorb to help it complete tasks.

The new V4 is released as two versions, DeepSeek-V4-Pro and DeepSeek-V4-Flash, with the latter being "a more efficient and economical choice" because it has smaller parameters.

In terms of "world knowledge", a benchmark for reasoning, V4-Pro trails only the latest Gemini model, DeepSeek said.

A "preview version" of the open source model is now available, the company said, without indicating when a final version would be released.

Experts say V4's arrival marks an "inflection point" in terms of hardware and cost.

"This addresses the long-standing issues of slower performance and higher costs associated with long context lengths, marking a genuine inflection point for the industry," Zhang Yi, the founder of tech research firm iiMedia, told AFP.

"For end users, this will bring widespread, accessible benefits. For instance, if ultra-long context support becomes a standard feature, long-text processing is expected to move beyond high-end research labs and enter mainstream commercial applications," he said.

V4-Pro has 1.6 trillion parameters while the V4-Flash has 284 billion parameters, which refine models' decision-making ability.

The model has also been "optimized" for popular AI Agent products such as Claude Code, OpenClaw, OpenCode and CodeBuddy, the DeepSeek statement said.

It can also run on chips manufactured by Chinese tech giant Huawei, the company added.

Huawei -- sanctioned by the US since 2019 over national security -- said in a statement Friday that the full range of its Ascend SuperPoD products are supporting DeepSeek's V4 series.

DeepSeek's latest release is a "milestone" for Chinese firms, said veteran AI industry analyst Max Liu.

"It's a good thing for the entire domestic AI industry. It can provide better models for domestic users and we can now expect a lot more things -- more products (and a) more competitive market," he told AFP.

"This is no less shocking than when DeepSeek first came out" if its new model indeed matches the performance of leading models from Western labs, he added.

Last year's so-called "DeepSeek shock" sparked a sell-off of AI-related shares and a reckoning on business strategy in what was also described as a "Sputnik moment" for the industry.

The chatbot performed at a similar level to ChatGPT and other top American offerings, but the company said it had taken significantly less computing power to develop.

However, its sudden popularity raised questions over data privacy and censorship, with the chatbot often refusing to answer questions on sensitive topics such as the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown.

DeepSeek's AI tools have been widely adopted by Chinese municipalities and healthcare institutions as well as the financial sector and other businesses.

This has been partly driven by DeepSeek's decision to make its systems open source, with their inner workings public -- in contrast to the proprietary models sold by OpenAI and other Western rivals.

But the White House has accused Chinese firms of vying to "steal" American technology, ahead of an expected summit between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping in Beijing next month.

"The US has evidence that foreign entities, primarily in China, are running industrial-scale distillation campaigns to steal American AI," Trump's science and technology chief advisor Michael Kratsios said in a post on X.

Distillation is a common practice within AI development, often used by companies to create cheaper, smaller versions of their own models.

"The US claims are entirely baseless," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun told a news conference in Beijing. "They are a slanderous smear against the achievements of China's artificial intelligence industry."