Zuckerberg Faces Jury Over Kids’ Online Harm
In a packed courtroom in Los Angeles, Mark Zuckerberg took the witness stand this week to confront one of the most consequential questions facing the tech industry: did social media platforms knowingly design products that harm children?
For the first time, the chief executive of Meta testified before a jury on claims that Instagram’s features were engineered to be addictive, drawing in young users and damaging their mental health. Just a few feet away sat the young woman at the centre of the case, identified in court as Kaley, who alleges she was drawn into social media as a child and suffered lasting psychological harm as a result.
Zuckerberg told jurors he believed Meta had handled youth safety “in a reasonable way”, arguing that decisions about Instagram were informed by feedback from researchers, parents and wellbeing experts. His testimony comes in a landmark trial that could shape how courts, regulators and the public judge the responsibilities of social media companies toward young users.
Outside the courthouse, however, a very different story was being told. Parents from across the United States gathered to say their children were harmed – and in some cases died – after struggles linked to social media use. They described a company they believe prioritised engagement and profit over protection.
“This wasn’t accidental,” said Julianna Arnold, who links the death of her teenage daughter to Instagram use. Watching Zuckerberg testify, she said, felt “surreal” after years of campaigning for stronger safeguards.
The case centres on whether Meta and YouTube deliberately built features that encouraged compulsive use among children. Kaley’s legal team says she joined Instagram at age nine, years before the platform required users to enter a birthdate. Lawyers pointed to internal company documents suggesting millions of users under 13 were active on Instagram despite official age limits.
Under questioning, Zuckerberg acknowledged that earlier versions of Instagram relied on users confirming they were over 13, rather than verifying age. He said privacy concerns delayed stronger age checks, but argued the company ultimately adopted the right policies.
The trial has also shone a light on internal debates over engagement. Zuckerberg pushed back against claims that Meta set out to maximise time spent on the app, saying the company later shifted its focus toward “utility and value”. Lawyers countered with older internal emails referencing growth targets tied to user time on Instagram.
Another tense moment came over Instagram’s “beauty” filters, which critics say fuel body image issues among young people. Zuckerberg said Meta chose not to promote such filters directly, attempting to balance free expression with safety concerns.
Legal experts say the outcome could have far-reaching consequences. If the jury finds against Meta, the verdict could open the door to hundreds of similar lawsuits and force changes to products used by billions worldwide.
For now, the jury must decide whether Instagram was a substantial factor in Kaley’s mental health struggles – and whether one of the world’s most powerful tech companies did enough to protect its youngest users.
