BY EMMANUEL OGBONNA
Adam Mosseri, the head of Meta’s Instagram, took the witness stand Wednesday in a closely watched trial in Los Angeles that could reshape how social media companies are held accountable for the impact of their platforms on young users. In hours of testimony, Mosseri pushed back against the central allegation in the case — that social media platforms are designed in ways that create clinical addiction among children and teenagers.
The lawsuit is one of the most significant legal challenges yet to the tech industry’s business model and design practices. Plaintiffs are seeking to hold companies responsible for alleged harms to minors, arguing that certain features and algorithms foster compulsive use and contribute to mental health struggles. Meta Platforms and Google’s YouTube remain the two defendants in the case after TikTok and Snap reached settlements.
At the heart of the Los Angeles proceedings is a 20-year-old plaintiff identified in court documents only by the initials “KGM.” Her case, along with two others selected for bellwether trials, is intended to serve as a test for thousands of similar lawsuits filed across the United States. The outcome is expected to influence how future claims against social media companies are litigated and potentially resolved.
On the stand, Mosseri sought to draw a distinction between what he described as clinical addiction and what he called “problematic use.” He testified that he does not believe people can be clinically addicted to social media in the same way they can to substances or gambling. When confronted with past comments from a podcast interview in which he used the word “addiction” to describe social media behavior, Mosseri acknowledged that he may have used the term too casually.
He told the court that he is not a medical expert and does not claim authority to diagnose or define addiction in a clinical sense. He added that someone close to him has struggled with serious addiction, which has made him cautious about how he uses the term. Within Meta, he said, executives and teams refer instead to “problematic use,” meaning situations in which users spend more time on Instagram than they feel is healthy or beneficial.
“That definitely happens,” Mosseri testified, acknowledging that some users may feel they are spending excessive time on the platform. However, he maintained that it is not in the company’s long-term interest to design products that undermine users’ well-being.
“It’s not good for the company, over the long run, to make decisions that profit for us but are poor for people’s well-being,” he said, arguing that user trust and satisfaction are essential to sustainable business performance.
The courtroom exchange grew more pointed during questioning by plaintiffs’ attorney Mark Lanier, who pressed Mosseri on Instagram’s use of cosmetic filters and augmented reality tools that alter users’ appearances. Lanier suggested that such features may contribute to body image issues and even encourage interest in cosmetic surgery among young users.
Mosseri responded that the company attempts to balance safety with freedom of expression. “We are trying to be as safe as possible but also censor as little as possible,” he said, adding that product decisions often involve complex trade-offs.
The discussion of body dysmorphia and appearance-altering filters visibly affected some of the bereaved parents and family members in the courtroom, many of whom have lost children or say their children experienced severe mental health challenges linked to social media use. Following emotional reactions in the gallery, the judge reminded observers that outward displays of agreement or disagreement with testimony were inappropriate and could disrupt the proceedings.
Meta shut down all third-party augmented reality filters on Instagram in January 2025, a move the company has framed as part of its broader effort to strengthen youth protections.
During cross-examination, Mosseri and Meta’s attorney, Phyllis Jones, sought to counter the implication that Instagram deliberately targets teenagers as a lucrative audience. Mosseri testified that Instagram generates less revenue from teens than from any other demographic group on the platform. He noted that many teenagers do not have significant disposable income and are less likely to click on advertisements.
Lanier responded by pointing to research suggesting that users who join social media platforms at a young age are more likely to remain active for years, making them valuable long-term customers. He argued that cultivating early engagement can translate into sustained revenue over time, even if immediate advertising returns from teenagers are lower.
Mosseri rejected the notion that Meta views safety and profitability as competing priorities. “Often people try to frame things as you either prioritize safety or you prioritize revenue,” he said. “It’s really hard to imagine any instance where prioritizing safety isn’t good for revenue.”
The trial comes amid intensifying scrutiny of social media platforms’ impact on youth mental health. In recent years, Instagram has introduced features aimed at reducing harmful content exposure, including parental supervision tools, content filters and restrictions on direct messaging between adults and minors. The company says these measures demonstrate its commitment to making the platform safer for young people.
Nevertheless, independent research has raised questions about the effectiveness of those safeguards. A report published last year found that accounts created by researchers posing as teenagers were recommended age-inappropriate sexual content, including explicit descriptions and brief displays of nudity. The report also found that teen accounts were exposed to material related to self-harm, body image struggles and other potentially harmful themes.
According to the researchers, such content could reasonably contribute to adverse mental health outcomes among vulnerable young users. Meta has disputed those findings, describing the report as misleading and speculative, and asserting that it mischaracterized the company’s safety efforts.
The trial is expected to continue for several weeks, with Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg scheduled to testify next week. His appearance is likely to draw heightened public and media attention, as plaintiffs seek to probe how high-level executives shaped the company’s approach to product design, youth engagement and risk management.
As the case unfolds, it is poised to test the boundaries of corporate responsibility in the digital age, potentially redefining how courts assess the relationship between platform design, user behavior and the mental health of a generation raised online.
Original article
Comments