Meta, the parent company of Instagram and Facebook, is facing trial in a California federal court over allegations that it knowingly and deliberately designed features to addict children to its platforms, contributing to the youth mental health crisis.
California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey are seeking billions of dollars in damages and fundamental changes to how Meta runs its platforms. The states claim Meta gathers data from children aged 13 without the consent of their parents, a major breach of US federal law if proven accurate.
The lawsuit also argues that Meta routinely collects data on children under 13 without their parents’ consent, in violation of federal law. The company strongly denies the allegations.
Opening Statements
The trial started on Tuesday, August 18. A jury will decide whether or not the tech giant designed its apps to “hook the users, hold them for as long as they can, harvest their data and hide the truth from the public,” as Megan O’Neill, a deputy attorney general for the California Department of Justice, put it in her opening statement.
O’Neill told the court: “You’re going to hear that Meta knew a lot about kids’ brains.” This includes how they are constantly seeking rewards, how they are sensitive to social feedback and “how they are still developing their ability to control impulses the way adults do.”
Meta, she said, researched these vulnerabilities and talked about how it could change Instagram to respond to them. She said: “‘The young ones are the best ones’ is a title of a Meta study we are going to show you.” Meta, O’Neill said, also knew that kids under 13 were using its products even though they were banned from it, and “failed to take the simplest most obvious steps to keep them off.”
Former Executive Testifies
Former Meta executive Arturo Béjar, who worked as an engineering director at Facebook from 2009 to 2015, was the first witness to be called. Béjar said that, contrary to Meta’s statements, the company’s research on safety issues was not being used to improve products. For example, regarding eating disorder content, Meta’s engineers “had very good ideas on how to make it better” so that users, especially young ones, would not be exposed to it. “But once it was reviewed, it got whittled down to a little pebble that didn’t make a difference,” he said.
Meta’s Defense
Meta lawyer Paul Schmidt said he will focus on the work Meta does to make its platforms safer and share information with the public. He said: “Much of this lawsuit is about the government attorneys and their witnesses saying in trying to improve, we’d do it a little differently. In talking about how to improve, we disagree with how you talk about it. It’s meaningful, and the evidence will be meaningful, these efforts Meta has taken to improve.”
The proceedings are expected to last six weeks. The trial is expected to hear testimony from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and other executives as well as former employees. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland is overseeing the trial.
If Meta loses the trial, the court would have wide discretion over the size of any financial penalty. Meta has said if it loses, the case could result in damages amounting to $1.4 trillion, but legal experts believe that would be unlikely.
