It’s been a brutal week in the courts for Meta and Google, and honestly, it feels like a long time coming. Two separate juries have now ruled against these tech giants in landmark cases that expose just how willing they’ve been to prioritize profit over the safety and wellbeing of young people.

Let’s start with the big one: A Los Angeles jury found both Meta and Google liable on Wednesday for deliberately designing addictive platforms that harmed teens. The case centered on Kaley, a 20-year-old who started using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 11. Her attorneys argued, and a jury agreed, that both companies knew exactly what they were doing when they engineered these platforms to be as addictive as possible, all while being fully aware of the mental health crisis they were creating. For Kaley, that addiction led to depression and suicidal thoughts. The jury awarded her $6 million in damages, with Meta covering about 70% of that tab.

“For years, social media companies have profited from targeting children while concealing their addictive and dangerous design features”, said co-lead attorney Joseph VanZandt. “Today’s verdict is a referendum, from a jury, to an entire industry, that accountability has arrived”.

The verdict drew comparisons to the major tobacco industry lawsuits of the 1990s, and honestly, the parallels are striking. Both industries knowingly designed addictive products and lied about the harms.

But it gets worse for Meta. Just a day earlier, a New Mexico jury hit the company with a $375 million verdict in a child exploitation case. The jury found that Meta engaged in “unfair and deceptive” and “unconscionable” trade practices by failing to protect young users from predators on its platforms. This case came after New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez’s investigation uncovered just how vulnerable kids were to sexual exploitation on Instagram. The investigation used fake accounts as bait, and predators took the bait immediately, two men were even arrested at a motel in May 2024 after attempting to meet with someone they believed was a 12-year-old.

Meta’s response? They’re playing defense. The company is appealing both verdicts and arguing that they’ve invested heavily in child safety. But former Meta engineer Arturo Bejar, who testified in the New Mexico case, revealed that his own 14-year-old daughter was targeted with sexually explicit messages on Instagram, which kind of says everything you need to know about how effective those safety measures really are.

Meanwhile, Google says it plans to appeal the Los Angeles verdict, claiming YouTube is a streaming platform, not social media. Sure, Jan. And Meta? They’re “weighing their options”.

The bottom line: These verdicts represent a massive shift in how courts are treating Big Tech’s responsibility for the harms their platforms cause. If you’re a Gen Z or millennial who’s been sucked into the doom scroll or harassed online, these cases are validating what you’ve probably already known, these companies built their platforms to exploit you.