Mark Zuckerberg faced tough questions in a high-profile court case in Los Angeles. The trial is centered on whether Meta, the parent company of Instagram, intentionally designed its platform to be addictive for young users. During a tense exchange, Zuckerberg reacted defensively when lawyers pointed out that many young users lie about their age to access Instagram.
Lawyer Mark Lanier referred to a 2020 Meta document that revealed 11-year-olds engage with Facebook four times more than older users, despite Instagram’s minimum age of 13. Zuckerberg conceded that enforcing age limits is challenging but maintained that the goal is to create useful services.
Evidence presented by Lanier suggested that over 30% of 10- to 12-year-olds in the U.S. were active on Instagram, implying that the platform was designed to attract younger users. The lawyer emphasized that Meta’s internal documents showed a strategy to draw in this age group.
Zuckerberg defended Instagram’s features, claiming that tools like beauty filters allow users to express themselves, even though they have been linked to body image issues among teenagers. He argued that getting rid of these filters would be “paternalistic.”
Kaley, the plaintiff, is a 20-year-old woman who claims her mental health struggles worsened after using social media from a young age. Her lawsuit highlights features like infinite scroll and beauty filters as contributing factors to her issues. The case isn’t just about her; it influences about 1,600 other lawsuits with similar claims.
The trial reflects a growing concern over social media’s impact on mental health. Studies suggest a correlation between heavy social media use and increased rates of depression and anxiety, especially among young users. This trial might set a precedent for how social media companies are seen in terms of product liability.
Historically, tech companies enjoyed protections under laws like Section 230, which shielded them from being held accountable for user-generated content. However, this trial is unique in treating social media services as potentially defective products.
The jury must now evaluate whether Meta and Zuckerberg acted irresponsibly. The outcome could change how tech companies approach user safety and mental health issues in the future.
For more insights, you can read about the effects of social media on mental health here.
