Mark Zuckerberg Defends Meta Apps in Los Angeles Court Over Youth Addiction Claims

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified this week in Los Angeles. The trial is about claims that Instagram and other Meta apps harm young people, with over 1,600 families suing.
By Newsroom | Technology, Law |

The Chief Executive Officer of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg, appeared in a Los Angeles court this week to answer questions about the safety of his social media apps. This trial is a major event because it involves over 1,600 families who claim that platforms like Instagram caused their children to suffer from depression and other health problems. The legal outcome could change how all tech companies are held responsible for what happens to their users. During his testimony, Zuckerberg defended his company’s actions, while lawyers for the families used internal company emails to argue that the platform was designed to be hard to put down. The stakes are high for the tech industry, as a loss for Meta could lead to many more lawsuits across the country.

Chronology and Key Participants

The trial focuses on whether Meta knowingly created a product that harms young people. This case is being watched closely as countries like Australia and Spain move toward banning or strictly limiting social media for children.

Read More: MSD and Mayo Clinic use AI to find new medicines faster starting 2024

Zuckerberg's Trial Testimony Pushes Back on Social Media Addiction Claims - 1

  • Location: Los Angeles County Court.

  • Main Actor: Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta.

  • Legal Representative for Plaintiffs: Mark Lanier, a lawyer representing families.

  • The Litigants: Families of approximately 1,600 children alleging harm from app usage.

  • Key Event: A full day of testimony where Zuckerberg was questioned about internal emails, age checks, and his past statements to the government.

"I think a reasonable company should try to help the people that use its services." — Mark Zuckerberg during court testimony.

Evidence and Testimony Data

CategoryEvidence PresentedZuckerberg's Response
User EngagementInternal emails discussing goals for time spent on the app.Claims the company moved away from "time spent" goals to focus on "utility."
Expert AdviceReports from 18 mental health experts warning about beauty filters.Stated the experts did not present data he found "compelling."
Age LimitsEvidence of children under 13 using the platform.Stated the company has a ban on under-13s, but some users lie about their age.
Corporate IntentInternal slide decks showing focus on "authentic" behavior.Argued he did not want to be "paternalistic" or "overbearing" in limiting expression.

The core of the trial rests on whether Meta prioritizes the health of young users or the amount of time they spend on the apps.

Analysis of Conflict: Business Goals vs. Safety

App Design and Time Spent

Lawyers for the families claimed that Meta designs its apps to keep users scrolling for as long as possible. They argued that this "addictive" design is a choice made to make more money.

Zuckerberg's Trial Testimony Pushes Back on Social Media Addiction Claims - 2

  • Zuckerberg testified that while the company used to track how much time people spent on the app, they chose to stop.

  • He explained that the company now focuses on how useful the app is for connecting people.

  • If the company no longer uses "time spent" as a goal, why is it still used to compare Meta against competitors like TikTok?

Expert Warnings on Beauty Filters

Evidence was shown that 18 mental health experts warned Meta that certain beauty filters could be harmful to the self-image of teenage girls.

  • Zuckerberg stated he chose not to ban these filters because he did not want to tell people how they should express themselves.

  • He also mentioned that the research provided by the experts was not strong enough to force a change.

  • Did the company prioritize "free expression" over the health warnings of experts, or was the research truly not strong enough to act on?

Protecting Children Under 13

The court discussed how easy it is for children under the age of 13 to join Instagram despite the company's rules.

Read More: US Judge Stops New Policy to Detain Refugees Without Green Cards in Minnesota

Zuckerberg's Trial Testimony Pushes Back on Social Media Addiction Claims - 3

  • Zuckerberg maintained that children under 13 have never been allowed on the platform.

  • He acknowledged that some children lie about their age to get around the rules.

  • Lawyers questioned if the company's age verification is strong enough to keep children safe.

  • Is it possible for a large tech company to accurately verify the age of every user, or are the current systems intentionally easy to bypass?

Expert Observations

Industry watchers and children’s advocates have closely followed the testimony. Many advocates described the CEO's answers as "disingenuous," suggesting he was not being fully honest about how the apps work. On the other hand, legal experts noted that Zuckerberg remained calm and often pointed out that he was not part of many of the email chains shown as evidence.

Meta continues to use a report from the National Academies of Sciences to support their side. This report states that research does not clearly prove that social media causes changes in the mental health of children. This creates a gap between the personal experiences of the 1,600 families and the scientific data the company chooses to follow.

Zuckerberg's Trial Testimony Pushes Back on Social Media Addiction Claims - 4

Summary of Findings

The trial has highlighted a significant disagreement between how Meta views its responsibilities and how families experience its products. Zuckerberg claims the company is a tool for connection that tries to help its users. The families argue that the apps are designed to be addictive and that their warnings were ignored.

Read More: Rivian Apple Watch App Lets Owners Control Cars From Wrist Starting February 19, 2026

Key Points:

  • Meta denies using "addiction" as a business model but admits to tracking time spent as a performance measure.

  • Zuckerberg defended his decision to keep beauty filters by citing a desire not to be "paternalistic."

  • The trial will determine if Meta is legally responsible for the mental health of its younger users.

The next steps in the trial will involve more testimony from experts and former employees. If the court finds against Meta, it could lead to new laws and many more lawsuits for the entire tech industry.

Sources Used

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Why did Mark Zuckerberg testify in Los Angeles this week?
Mark Zuckerberg testified in a Los Angeles court as part of a trial where over 1,600 families claim Meta's social media apps, like Instagram, have harmed their children's mental health. He was questioned about the company's practices and app design.
Q: What are the main claims against Meta in this trial?
Families claim that Meta's platforms are designed to be addictive and have caused their children to suffer from depression and other health problems. They presented internal company emails as evidence.
Q: How did Mark Zuckerberg respond to the claims during his testimony?
Zuckerberg defended Meta's actions, stating the company no longer focuses on maximizing user time on apps and has moved towards focusing on utility and connection. He also defended the use of beauty filters by citing a desire not to be overly controlling of user expression.
Q: What could be the impact if Meta loses this trial?
A loss for Meta could lead to significant legal and financial consequences, potentially opening the door for many more lawsuits against tech companies across the country and influencing future regulations on social media.
Q: What evidence was presented about children under 13 using Meta apps?
Evidence suggested that children under 13 are able to use Meta platforms despite the company's rules against it. Zuckerberg stated that while the company bans users under 13, some children lie about their age to access the apps, and the company's age verification systems are in place to address this.
Q: What is the core disagreement in this trial?
The trial highlights a major difference in perspective: Meta, through Zuckerberg, argues it provides a useful tool for connection and that research doesn't clearly link social media to mental health issues. The families argue the apps are intentionally designed to be addictive, and their warnings were ignored.