Meta Faces Landmark US Trial Over Claims Facebook And Instagram Harm Children

Meta Faces Landmark US Trial Over Claims Facebook And Instagram Harm Children

Meta Platforms has gone on trial in California over allegations that Facebook and Instagram were deliberately designed in ways that could keep children and teenagers hooked while putting their mental health at risk.

The case, being heard in a federal court in Oakland, brings together a coalition of 29 US states. California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey are leading the action.

At the centre of the case is an allegation that Meta prioritised keeping young users on its platforms for as long as possible because their attention and personal data were valuable to the company.

Opening the case for the states, California Deputy Attorney-General Megan O’Neill told jurors that Meta’s business model was built around keeping users engaged, collecting their data and concealing information about potential dangers.

She argued that the strategy was particularly effective among children.

“This case is not about whether social media has some benefits for some people. It does,” O’Neill told the jury.

Instead, she said, the case would examine whether Meta crossed a line by designing its platforms in ways that could exploit the vulnerabilities of young users.

The states allege that Facebook and Instagram were developed with features capable of encouraging compulsive use, including endless scrolling and other mechanisms designed to keep people returning to the platforms.

They also accuse Meta of misleading parents and the wider public about the safety of its services.

The company strongly disputes those claims. Meta’s lawyer, Paul Schmidt, told the jury that there was no question some people experienced difficulties with social media, but argued that this did not amount to addiction.

He also maintained that existing research did not establish a clear connection between adolescent social media use and poor wellbeing.

Meta is expected to argue that it has invested heavily in protecting children and teenagers online.

The company says it has introduced safety measures and systems intended to identify users who may be under the required age. Schmidt told the court that Meta had flagged about 1.4 million accounts over four years where it appeared users could be younger than 13.

But the states are expected to rely heavily on Meta’s own internal documents and research.

During opening arguments, O’Neill referred to internal communications in which employees discussed increasing the amount of time teenagers spent on Instagram.

She also told jurors that some Meta employees had privately compared Instagram with a drug and themselves with people selling it.

Meta’s lawyers are expected to argue that such comments were informal language used by individual employees and did not represent the company’s actual policies.

The states also allege that Meta studied how children’s brains responded to online stimuli and monitored their behaviour on its platforms while failing to adequately protect them.

The lawsuit includes claims involving anxiety, depression and suicide among young users, although establishing a direct legal connection between those harms and Meta’s products will be one of the central challenges for the states.

The case also covers allegations that Meta improperly collected and used children’s personal information in violation of US federal law.

Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s co-founder and chief executive, is expected to testify during the proceedings. Instagram chief Adam Mosseri is also expected to appear.

The trial is scheduled to continue for about six weeks.

Although jurors are expected to issue an advisory verdict, the final decision on Meta’s liability will rest with US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.

If Meta is found liable, the judge could impose civil penalties and order changes to the way Facebook and Instagram operate.

The potential financial consequences are enormous.

The states have suggested that penalties could approach $200 billion, although Meta has previously warned that the financial exposure could be considerably higher.

The states are also seeking changes to the platforms, including stronger age restrictions and the removal or modification of features such as infinite scrolling.

The lawsuit dates back to 2023 and followed a wider investigation into the effect of Facebook and Instagram on young users.

It also came after former Meta employee and whistleblower Frances Haugen told the US Senate in 2021 that the company knew some of its products could harm young people and had information that could help make them safer.

The California case is now being watched far beyond the courtroom.

Meta is not the only technology company facing legal challenges over the impact of social media on children. Snap, TikTok’s parent company ByteDance and Google’s parent company Alphabet are also facing lawsuits from states, local governments, school districts and individuals.

Earlier this year, a Los Angeles jury ordered Meta and Google to pay $6 million to a young woman who said she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube after being exposed to the platforms as a child.

In another case, a New Mexico judge ordered Meta to pay $567 million into a fund aimed at addressing mental-health problems among teenagers after finding against the company in a case brought by that state’s attorney-general.

The California trial therefore represents more than another dispute between governments and a technology company.

It is becoming a test of a much larger question: how much responsibility should social media companies bear for the way their platforms affect children?

For Meta, the answer could have consequences not only for Facebook and Instagram, but potentially for the wider social-media industry.