Meta Faces Landmark US Trial Over Claims It Hooked Children on Social Media

A landmark federal trial opened in Oakland, California, on Tuesday, with Meta Platforms firmly rejecting accusations from a bipartisan coalition of 29 US states that it deliberately engineered its Facebook and Instagram apps to addict young users for profit.

The states, led by California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey, allege that Meta designed its platforms to hook children, contributing to anxiety, depression, and even suicide. They also claim the company violated federal law by improperly collecting and using personal data from minors.

In opening statements, California Deputy Attorney General Megan O'Neill 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." She argued this strategy was particularly effective with children, asserting that "Meta needed kids, and it needed to reassure the people who cared about those kids that the kids are safe."

Meta's attorney, Paul Schmidt, acknowledged that some people struggle with social media but argued this does not constitute addiction. He pointed to research showing no clear link between adolescent social media use and a lack of well-being, and maintained that CEO Mark Zuckerberg and the company are focused on improving their services, not making them dangerous.

While the jury will issue an advisory verdict, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will ultimately determine liability. If found liable, Meta could face civil penalties and be ordered to make significant changes to its platforms, such as removing likes and infinite scroll, and implementing age restrictions and time limits for younger users.

Meta has warned that penalties could reach $1.4 trillion, while the states have suggested a figure closer to $200 billion. The trial, which is expected to last six weeks, will feature testimony from Zuckerberg and Instagram chief Adam Mosseri.

During the opening, the states presented internal evidence, including an email to Mosseri that set "teen time spent" as a goal, and showed that employees referred to Instagram as a "drug" and themselves as "pushers." Schmidt countered that such language was "loose" and highlighted Meta's efforts to develop safety tools and flag accounts of users under 13.

The case is the biggest legal test yet of social media's impact on young users, coming amid thousands of similar lawsuits against major tech companies. It follows a 2023 lawsuit initiated after whistleblower Frances Haugen's testimony, and recent court rulings that have ordered Meta to pay significant sums in other child-safety cases.