O’Neill laid out the state’s case to the eight jurors, saying that they can expect to “hear that Meta knew a lot about kids’ brains, including “how they are still developing their ability to control impulses the way adults do.”
Lawyers for a coalition of states provided opening statements in a bellwether trial against Meta Platforms that began Tuesday in a California-based federal court.
According to CBS News, attorneys general for the plaintiff states, which include California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey, are seeking a financial penalty that, in theory, could cost Meta more than $1.4 trillion. If the states have their way, Meta may also be ordered to change the way that it does business on platforms like Facebook and Instagram.
These four states, notes CBS News, are among 29 that sued Meta in 2023 over issues relating to child safety and digital privacy; the other 25 states are continuing to litigate their claims, which are expected to move to trial at a later date.
The four states claim that Meta contributed to a burgeoning youth mental health crisis by knowingly and deliberately introducing design features it knew would prove addictive for its youngest and most vulnerable users. The lawsuit also accuses Meta of routinely collecting data on children under the age of 13 without first obtaining their parents’ consent, potentially in violation of federal law.
Paul Schmidt, an attorney for Meta, told the court on Tuesday that current research does not support claims that social media poses an unusual threat to teenagers’ well-being; he also pushed back on allegations that platforms like Instagram and Facebook are “addictive.”
Meta and its leadership, Schmidt said, have continuously worked to improve the platform’s safety features.
“They don’t believe they’re going to do well if people don’t like their service,” he said.
But Megan O’Neill, deputy attorney general for the California Department of Justice, said that technology companies like Meta intentionally make applications to “hook the users, hold them for as long as they can, harvest their data, and hide the truth from the public.”
“It worked especially well for kids,” she said.
O’Neill laid out the state’s case to the eight jurors, saying that they can expect to “hear that Meta knew a lot about kids’ brains, including “how they are still developing their ability to control impulses the way adults do.”
Meta, O’Neill claims, researched these vulnerabilities and actively sought ways to exploit them for its own benefit.
“‘The young ones are the best ones’ is a title of a Meta study we are going to show you,” she said, telling kids that, for Meta, “kids are the product.”
O’Neill also said that, even though kids under the age of 13 are prohibited from using Meta products, the company “failed to take the simplest, most obvious steps to keep them off” Facebook and Instagram.
In some cases, O’Neill told the jury, Meta would take action against underage users by deactivating their Facebook accounts—but would leave their connected Instagram accounts intact.
The states also called as their first witness former Meta executive Arturo Bejar, who worked as engineering director at Facebook from 2009 until 2015; Bejar later worked as a contractor on safety-related issues between 2019 to 2021.
Speaking to the jury, he said that, contrary to Meta’s claims, the company’s research on child safety has less to do with security than marketing. One study, for instance, was conducted on content that promotes eating disorders. According to Bejar, Meta’s engineers “had very good ideas on how to make it better” so that users, especially young users, would not be exposed to potentially harmful content.
“But once it was reviewed,” he said, “it got whittled down to a little pebble that didn’t make a difference.”
Sources
Meta’s federal trial begins over child social media addiction claims
Meta is on trial – again. Here’s what to know about the case brought by dozens of states
Meta trial begins in Oakland with states arguing its platforms preyed on young brains
Join the conversation!