- A coalition of 29 US states accuses Meta of designing addictive features on Instagram and Facebook for minors.
- The company could face penalties of up to $1,4 trillion, a figure close to its market value.
- The plaintiffs are demanding structural changes such as eliminating infinite scrolling and intrusive notifications.
- Meta denies the accusations and asserts that 'social media addiction' is not a recognized medical diagnosis.
Meta, the tech company that owns Instagram and Facebook, is currently in the dock at a federal court in California. A coalition of 29 state attorneys general accuses the company of deliberately implementing addictive features to hook young people onto its platforms, prioritizing profit over their mental health. The case, which began Tuesday in Oakland, has become the biggest legal challenge regarding addictive design that Mark Zuckerberg's company has faced in its history.
The trial, which is expected to last between four and eight weeks, is being presided over by federal judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. Both Zuckerberg and Instagram CEO Adam Mosseri are scheduled to testify in the coming weeks. The prosecution alleges that Meta violated the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) by collecting data from children under 13 without parental consent, and that it also misled consumers about the security of its services. The financial penalties could reach $1,4 billion , an amount approaching the company's market capitalization.
An unprecedented trial for the mental health of minors
The attorneys general of California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey are leading the prosecution on behalf of all 29 states. Rob Bonta, California's attorney general, has been unequivocal: “Exploiting our most vulnerable residents to increase corporate profits is not only morally wrong, but illegal.” For his part, Phil Weiser, Colorado's attorney general, has linked the case to the serious mental health crisis affecting young people and insisted that Big Tech must be held accountable. The lawsuit is part of a much larger multidistrict litigation, with more than 3.000 plaintiffs against Meta, Google, TikTok, and Snap, accusing these companies of designing platforms to maximize screen time and encourage addictive behaviors.
Among the features cited as problematic are infinite scrolling, constant notifications, algorithms that prioritize interaction, and automatic content recommendations. The plaintiffs maintain that Meta was aware of the risks through its own internal research but ignored them. They are also demanding the removal of all algorithms and artificial intelligence models trained on children's data and a restructuring of the systems to prioritize user well-being over engagement.
Addictive functions and the changes that states demand
If Judge Gonzalez Rogers grants the states' requests, the impact on the operation of Instagram and Facebook would be radical. The removal of infinite scrolling and intrusive notifications would be required , as well as the implementation of stricter age restrictions and time limits for minors. It is also proposed that the algorithms shift from prioritizing user retention to prioritizing user well-being. This would entail a change in the business model for Meta, which has been accused in Brussels of designing addictive social networks and relies on online advertising for 98% of its revenue.
Meta's defense, for its part, calls the accusations "baseless" and "grossly disproportionate." A company spokesperson asserted that the prosecutors have presented no evidence that anyone was deceived and are attempting to penalize the company for challenges affecting the entire industry, such as age verification. Furthermore, Meta argues that so-called "social media addiction" is not a recognized psychiatric diagnosis, and therefore the company cannot be considered to have misled consumers by presenting its services as non-addictive.
Meta's defense and his legal history
The company is entering this trial after several defeats in court. In early August, a New Mexico court ordered Meta to pay $567 million to a youth mental health reparations fund, and in March, a Los Angeles court ordered it, along with Google, to pay $6 million in damages to a young woman who reported social media addiction. These precedents have increased the pressure on the tech giant, which is also making heavy investments in artificial intelligence, with a projected expenditure of up to $145.000 billion this year. A multimillion-dollar penalty could jeopardize its expansion plans.
The Oakland trial is just the first in a series of lawsuits that could be filed against other platforms like TikTok or Snapchat. Experts are comparing it to the "Big Tobacco era" of the 90s, when cigarette companies had to pay billions for misleading the public. The judge's decision, expected in October, will set a key precedent for the future of social media regulation in the United States and, likely, the rest of the world.
Ultimately, Meta is risking much more than a fine: it's risking the way its platforms operate and the trust of millions of families. The social and political pressure is enormous, and the outcome of this case could redefine the boundaries of the tech industry in its relationship with minors. We'll have to wait for the coming weeks to see if the US justice system puts a stop to the company's practices or if, on the contrary, Meta's defense manages to convince the jury that its platforms are not responsible for the youth mental health crisis.
