Key facts
- Meta Platforms is facing a trial in federal court in Oakland, California, over allegations that its platforms harm youth mental health.
- Attorneys general from four states are seeking billions of dollars in damages and changes to the design of Instagram and Facebook.
- Parents and advocates gathered outside the courthouse, highlighting the names of children who have died due to social media-related harms.
- The lawsuit claims Meta intentionally designed its platforms to be addictive and dangerous for young users, and that the company misrepresented these risks.
- Meta denies the allegations and asserts that the trial will showcase its commitment to child safety measures.
Meta Platforms is defending its child safety measures in a California federal court trial, as attorneys general from four states seek billions of dollars in damages and changes to platform designs, alleging the company's products harm young users.
Opening statements commenced Tuesday in Oakland, California, with advocates and parents of social media victims gathering outside the courthouse. They displayed a banner bearing the names of children and young adults who have died from social media-related harms, such as suicide following cyberbullying or sextortion.
Parents involved in the case view this trial as a significant moment for online safety, representing the culmination of years of advocacy and pressure on social media companies. Meta has already lost two previous cases concerning harms to children and teens, which it is currently appealing.
The lawsuit's focus is on broad claims that Meta made design choices for Instagram and Facebook that endangered young users, and that the company knowingly misrepresented these risks. Meta has rejected these allegations, stating the trial will demonstrate its efforts to improve platform safety.
Many parents are anticipating the emergence of internal Meta documents as evidence. They believe the trial will expose the reality of social media's impact to the public. Some parents present were from the plaintiff states: California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey, and they expressed gratitude to their respective attorneys general.
Advocates emphasized that while Meta is a powerful company, its influence does not excuse the harm caused by its products. They stressed that no company, regardless of wealth or influence, should be above the law when it comes to protecting children.