Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s CEO, has testified in a high-stakes civil trial that could reshape how social media companies are held accountable for youth mental health and allegations of addictive design.
The case, heard in Los Angeles Superior Court, centres on whether products like Instagram and Facebook were engineered to be especially engaging and harmful to young people.
The lawsuit was brought by a now-20-year-old woman identified in court as ‘KGM,’ who claims she became compulsively hooked on Instagram and YouTube from a very early age, leading to anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation.
This case is being treated as a test that could influence more than 1,500 similar claims against major tech companies.
Zuckerberg’s defence
Zuckerberg, appearing before a jury for the first time in his role as Meta’s CEO, strongly denied that Meta intentionally designed its apps to be addictive or specifically to lure children onto its platforms.
He reiterated that Instagram’s policy forbids users under the age of 13 and stated that while teens do use the service, they contribute less than 1 per cent of Meta’s advertising revenue.
Read also: MTNN stock hits all-time high as investors price in IHS deal
Pressed about internal company documents and emails presented by plaintiff attorneys, Zuckerberg repeatedly described his words as ‘mischaracterised’ when framed as proof of intentional pursuit of young users or addictive design.
He said past engagement goals were internal benchmarks rather than directives to exploit them.
Zuckerberg acknowledged that enforcing age limits is difficult because many users lie about their date of birth, but stressed Meta’s belief that creating valuable products, not addictive hooks, is the company’s priority.
Contentious courtroom exchanges and Internal evidence
Mark Lanier, Plaintiff lawyer, challenged Zuckerberg over internal evidence suggesting that the early strategy at Facebook and Instagram involved increasing time spent on the platforms and that internal research flagged the potential for harm, BBC reported.
Zuckerberg insisted that metrics around engagement do not equate to addictive engineering, saying people spend more time on products they find useful.
Documents shown to jurors included a 2022 ‘milestones’ chart indicating increases in daily usage targets, which is a point Zuckerberg described as a ‘gut check’ rather than a company goal.
In another instance, the CEO acknowledged overruling 18 wellbeing experts who advised against Instagram’s ‘beauty filters,’ arguing that moderating such features would be ‘paternalistic’ and that users should have freedom of expression.
Broader context and implications
The trial is being closely watched not only in the U.S. but globally, as concerns over social media’s impact on youth mental health have prompted lawmakers in several countries to consider stricter age restrictions and safety regulations.
Read also: Google Gemini can now generate 30-second AI music
Meta, Google’s YouTube, and other platforms face waves of similar lawsuits and growing public pressure.
Experts from the scientific and child welfare community are expected to testify later in the trial, including on whether patterns of social media use meet clinical definitions of addiction.
Meta’s Instagram head previously testified that he views excessive use as ‘problematic’ rather than ‘clinically addictive,’ which is a distinction that may shape legal arguments as the case unfolds.
Why it matters
This case is widely seen as a potential turning point because it focuses on the design and operation of digital products, rather than individual user conduct or content moderation.
A verdict against Meta could open the door to significant change in how social media platforms are regulated, designed, and monetised in relation to young users.
