As jurors heard testimony in a landmark youth-technology case in Los Angeles, a 20-year-old woman identified in court documents as KGM told the court she felt pulled to social media as a child and that the platforms worsened her mental health. She said her early use made her spend time online “all day long,” and she linked that experience to depression and suicidal thoughts. The case is being tried against Meta and YouTube, with TikTok and Snap having settled, and it was selected as a bellwether trial that could influence outcomes in thousands of similar lawsuits.
KGM, now 20, said her social-media use began early: she testified that she started using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 9. During her testimony, her lawyer, Mark Lanier, asked about childhood memories while showing childhood photos, including scenes from her upbringing in Chico, California, and the court also saw her wearing a pink floral dress and a beige cardigan. KGM said she felt “very nervous” after Lanier asked how she was doing on Thursday morning.
She also described a relationship with her mother that, she said, included arguments often centered on her phone use. Both the plaintiffs and the defense pointed to a turbulent home life as part of the narrative around her mental health. KGM testified that she did not believe her mother’s past actions should be labeled as abuse or neglect today, saying, “she wasn’t perfect, but she was trying her best,” when asked about claims that her mother had hit her, abused her, and neglected her. During later cross-examination, however, she agreed that her mother was physically and emotionally abusive during the period when she was self-harming in the sixth grade.
KGM told the jury that she created multiple Instagram and YouTube accounts when she was younger to like and comment on her posts, and she described a practice of buying likes through a platform that allowed her to gain likes by liking other people’s photos. “It made me look popular,” she said. She also testified that notifications on both Instagram and YouTube produced what she described as a “rush,” explaining that the alerts came throughout the day and that she would go to the bathroom during school to check them. She said that even though she tried to set limits for herself, she could not get off the platforms.
Lanier also focused on features the plaintiffs argue were designed to be addictive, including Instagram filters that could alter a person’s appearance. Using a nearly 35-foot-long canvas banner filled with photographs KGM posted on Instagram, he asked about how many images used filters, and KGM said “almost all” of the photos had a filter on them. The jury was shown Instagram posts and YouTube videos she made as a child and young teenager, including a video in which she said she was “crying tears of joy” after reaching 100 YouTube subscribers but then quickly turned to her looks and apologized for an “ugly appearance.”
KGM testified that she did not experience negative feelings connected to a body dysmorphia diagnosis before she started using social media and filters. She also testified that her use is less intense now; while she said she uses YouTube less often, she told the court she believes she was previously addicted to it and described how limits she tried to set did not stick.
Meta’s defense attorneys, including lawyer Paul Schmidt in earlier arguments and Phyllis Jones in cross-examination Thursday, sought to shift the focus to challenges that KGM faced before using the platforms. In cross-examination, Jones questioned KGM while referencing her earlier 2025 deposition, and she repeatedly asked the witness to look at the transcript. The defense highlighted areas where KGM’s answers on Thursday differed from the earlier testimony, including questions about how actions by family members and experiences affected KGM’s mental health.
Jones also asked KGM about whether she had sought medical or mental health treatment specifically tied to social media addiction. KGM testified that she had never had a doctor or mental health care provider diagnose her with a social media addiction, that she had not been treated for an addiction to Instagram, and that she was never told by a provider to limit her Instagram use. She said she did not raise concerns about overuse or addiction with providers because she felt they would tell her to get off the platforms entirely, which she said she did not want.
The jury also heard testimony from Victoria Burke, a former therapist who worked with KGM in 2019. Burke testified Wednesday that KGM’s social media and sense of self “were closely related,” adding that what was happening on the platforms could “make or break her mood.” According to the account of the testimony, Burke’s treatment lasted about six months and took place about seven years before the trial, and her records of sessions included references to KGM’s feelings about her place at home, at school, and among peers, while also reflecting that KGM felt she had a place to be seen on social media.
As the trial continues for several weeks, the case remains focused on whether the remaining defendants—Meta and YouTube—played a substantial role in KGM’s mental-health struggles. The bellwether structure means the jury’s findings could shape how similar claims against other social media companies proceed.