Meta Platforms is fighting allegations from 29 US states that it deliberately designed Facebook and Instagram to hook children, as a major trial begins that could force changes to some of the world's most popular social media platforms. The states are seeking potentially tens or hundreds of billions of dollars in penalties, while also calling for changes to how Meta operates its services.
California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey are leading the case, accusing Meta of designing its platforms to keep young users engaged while allegedly contributing to anxiety, depression and suicide. The states also allege that Meta misled consumers about the safety of its platforms and improperly collected and used children's personal data.
Meta has rejected the accusations. Its lawyer Paul Schmidt told jurors that there was no clear research linking adolescent social media use with a lack of well-being.
Meta Rejects Claims of Addictive Design
Megan O'Neill, a deputy attorney general for California, told the eight-person jury that Meta's business model was to 'hook the users, hold them for as long as they can, harvest their data, and then hide the truth from the public.'
'It worked especially well for kids,' O'Neill added. 'Meta needed kids, and it needed to reassure the people who cared about those kids that the kids are safe.'
The states argue that Meta researched how children's brains respond to online stimuli and tracked their interactions on its platforms. O'Neill also pointed to an internal email sent to Instagram chief Adam Mosseri in which 'teen time spent' was described as the goal.
She said some Meta employees viewed Instagram as a 'drug' and themselves as 'pushers'. O'Neill said, 'Meta found the younger a kid is when they start using the app, the better.'
Schmidt acknowledged that employees might have used 'loose' language in private, but rejected the suggestion that Meta's products were addictive. He said jurors would hear about actions taken by the employee who compared Instagram to a drug to make the platform safer.
Schmidt also said there was 'no dispute' that some social media users face struggles. However, he argued that research did not show a clear link between adolescent social media use and a lack of well-being.
He said Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg shared the company's aim of improving its services rather than making them dangerous. 'They don't believe they're going to do well if people don't like their service,' Schmidt told the jury.
The states also accuse Meta of violating federal law by improperly collecting and using children's personal data. Meta and other companies, including Snap, TikTok parent ByteDance and YouTube parent Alphabet, are facing thousands of lawsuits involving allegations that their platforms harm young users.
The current case began in 2023, two years after whistleblower Frances Haugen told a US Senate committee that Meta knew its products were unsafe for children and knew how to make them safer, but did not make the necessary changes in pursuit of higher profits.
Judge Could Force Changes to Facebook and Instagram
The jury is expected to issue an advisory verdict, but US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will decide whether Meta is liable. If she finds against the company, she could impose civil penalties and order changes to Facebook and Instagram.
Meta reportedly said the penalties could reach as high as $1.4 trillion (£1.03 trillion), while attorneys general said last week that the figure could be closer to $200 billion (£147.79 billion), equivalent to about three years of Meta's after-tax profit.
California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey are also seeking changes to the platforms. Their proposals include removing likes and infinite scroll, introducing time limits for younger users and enforcing restrictions designed to keep children under 13 offline.
Former Meta safety engineer Arturo Bejar was the first witness called by the states after opening arguments. Bejar has previously said Meta knew its child safety tools did not work and had testified against the company in multiple trials.
Meta attempted to block Bejar's testimony, alleging that he had deleted Signal messages with former employees. Judge Rogers rejected the request, allowing him to remain a key witness in the case.
Bejar told jurors that 'move fast and break things' was a mantra at Meta. He also accused the company of taking a 'don't ask, don't tell' approach to monitoring whether children under 13 were using its platforms.
'Many products were shipped into the world,' including Reels short-form videos, 'and safety was not a consideration in how it was initially deployed,' Bejar said.
Zuckerberg and Mosseri are both expected to testify during the trial, which is scheduled to last six weeks. Meta's shares traded lower for most of Tuesday before closing down 4.4% at $543.67 (£401.72).
Outside the courthouse, critics also gathered as proceedings began. Mary Rodee said her 15-year-old son Riley Basford died by suicide in 2021 after being victimised by a predator on Facebook.
'They call it spontaneous suicide,' she said. 'I call it what it was, the predictable outcome of a system that protects corporations instead of children.'
The case comes after other legal setbacks for Meta. In March, a Los Angeles jury ordered Meta and Google to pay $6 million (£4.43 million) to a 20-year-old woman who said she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child.
Earlier this month, a New Mexico judge ordered Meta to pay $567 million (£418.85 million) to address teenagers' mental health after the state's attorney general called its platforms a public nuisance. Tennessee's attorney general is also pursuing a separate case against Meta over similar claims involving Instagram.
The Oakland trial will now determine whether the states can prove that Meta deliberately designed its platforms in a way that harmed young users, and whether the company could ultimately face penalties and orders to change how Facebook and Instagram operate.
