REED COWAN:
00:00:00
And right here, in my hand, I just got what the jury found. So let's get that right now to you. The jury found that Meta and YouTube are liable, both of them, on all charges. They then voted to award $3 million in damages, 70% responsibility given to Meta, 30% given to YouTube. Certainly, more to come on this story. So now that we know how the jury found in this case, let's go to Los Angeles, live and CBS News senior business and tech correspondent, Jo Ling Kent. You've been covering this for weeks, Jo Ling. We're understanding jurors are about to step out to let us know. And one more time, just for our viewers, $3 million in damages, 70% coming out of the pockets of Meta, 30% coming out of the pockets of YouTube. Reed, the key thing here is that the jury has found that Meta and YouTube are liable on all charges brought by the plaintiff. And so when you look at that and you zoom out and you think about what happened yesterday in New Mexico, where that jury found Meta liable for exploitation and a lack of safety for younger users on their platforms, these two verdicts, in the span of about 24 hours, mark a watershed moment for social media companies, and even more so for families with kids on social media. These are the first two cases of thousands of cases that are expected to find their way through the legal system against social media platforms in a way that holds their products, their algorithms, accountable. We have never seen this happen before. In my 15 years of covering social media, there have been so many attempts to regulate from the federal level, or the state level, individual cases brought. But now we are seeing an inflection point. We're awaiting a statement from Meta, as to what their response is here. And we look forward to hearing from the jury. But this particular finding from the jury, this verdict, Meta and YouTube, both liable on all charges in this LA Superior Court case, in addition to the New Mexico state attorney general's case that was won yesterday by the state of New Mexico is an incredibly important moment. As Meta said, in New Mexico, they plan to appeal that case. Of course, this is likely to be appealed. We're waiting for the Meta statement on this, but we're talking about features that were discussed in court, like infinite scroll, autoplay, the plaintiffs saying that these were factors in addicting her to the apps, affecting her mental health, including depression, anxiety, body dysmorphia. And when I zoom out and think about all of the different young people and families I've interviewed over the years who've had these challenges with social media, her testimony very much reflected what we had been reporting. So it will be interesting to see what else the jury says, what the attorneys on both sides have to say as they step out of LA Superior Court. But this is a trial where Mark Zuckerberg himself, the founder of Facebook, the CEO of Meta, was forced to testify and take the stand. We were in the room that day when that happened, and he was directly addressing the jury, trying to make the case that there was never any intention by his company to create addictive products. But this is a major moment, Reed, and we are looking forward to getting more detail. But we do know that this is likely to be appealed and is likely to be, perhaps, even a Supreme Court battle as we continue forward. But the jury in LA Superior Court find that Meta and YouTube are both liable on all charges. $3 million in damages to the plaintiff, 70% responsibility to Meta, and 30% responsibility to YouTube. You mentioned that it's a watershed moment. And I think if you boil it all down to the bones for one reason, if only for one reason, that is precedent, because this could pave the way for other similar actions, unless social media companies do what the plaintiffs allege, which is social responsibility as a social media platform. What changes do you think the people who sued would like to see happen for my kids who are on social media, for other people's children? There's a prevailing movement to have younger children just not be on social media. And so there is a hope throughout this community of activists and parents and families saying that they'd like to see a social media ban, so to speak, for 16 and under. That's something that's already underway in places like Australia. It's being considered in countries in Europe right now. But the issue here is that because there was no federal regulation, the tech companies will tell you, until they're blue in the face, that they want to be regulated. The lawmakers have told us, we have proposed legislation, but it never got through, oftentimes never to the floor to a vote in the Senate and House. And so even though these intentions have been spoken in such a way, there has been a lack of federal guidance and regulation on this front, which has led to today. And so the precedents that might be set today and yesterday in New Mexico will be useful to those who are filing these lawsuits who are in process, in different state courts around the country. And we also expect a multidistrict litigation in Oakland to begin later this year as well. And so this is a coalescing of momentum on behalf of the families and advocates who say enough is enough. The question is, in the New Mexico trial, for example, Reed, what kind of changes will be required that Meta should have to make per the court there in New Mexico? Will additional damages have to be paid there? There are a lot of open questions on whether or not this will lead to substantive change when it comes to that product that your kids or that you are scrolling.
