Zuckerberg faces families in court over Meta's social media harm accusations
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Zuckerberg arrives to the Los Angeles Superior Court on Feb. 18. Photo: Jill Connelly/Getty Images
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Wednesday was grilled for past statements about his company's role in child safety and knowledge of alleged harms.
Why it matters: This is the first time Zuckerberg has faced a jury in a courtroom alongside families who say that Meta's products harmed their children.
- This test case could determine the outcome of more than 1,500 other pending social media addiction cases that were consolidated from parents and school districts.
Zuckerberg argued Instagram is valuable and that's why "people will want to use it more," according to the New York Times.
- Zuckerberg was reportedly challenged on statements he made to Congress about social media addiction and his knowledge of internal documents raising those concerns.
- Mark Lanier, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, showed a 2017 internal document where Meta staff advised Zuckerberg to be more sympathetic when talking about child safety, according to the Times.
- Lanier also showed an email from 2015 in which Zuckerberg states his goal for 2016 was to increase users' time spent by 12%, according to the Wall Street Journal, and Zuckerberg responded they no longer have "time spent" goals.
- Lanier also showed a 2015 Meta email estimating four million children under 13 were using Instagram, according to reports.
Catch up quick: Meta and Google's YouTube are the remaining defendants in this bellwether case, which involves a 20-year old woman from California identified in court documents as K.G.M.
- K.G.M., also known as Kaley, started using YouTube when she was six and Instagram around age nine. She alleges social media addiction led to depression, anxiety and body dysmorphia. TikTok and Snap have settled.
- Plaintiffs' core argument is that social media is a product that should be held to product liability standards, not a platform where Section 230 shields company executives from liability for design choices.
The other side: Companies argue that age verification and parental controls are content-based, so Section 230 shields them from being liable for minors being exposed to harm.
- Meta during the course of this trial has argued that Kaley's mental health struggles are attributable to a variety of factors, including issues at home, and disputes Instagram played a substantial role.
- Meta's head of Instagram Adam Mosseri last week said in court that he disagrees people can be clinically addicted to social media.
The intrigue: Zuckerberg is no stranger to heated Capitol Hill hearings, but lawmakers have repeatedly tried and failed to erode Section 230, tech's liability shield.
- If plaintiffs are successful in proving Meta's design choices such as infinite scroll, Reels and the like button are harmful and addictive, the company could face hefty fines and be forced to make changes to its platforms.
The bottom line: The era of Zuckerberg making apologies to policymakers and parents appears to be over.
