Mark Zuckerberg is back under oath, and this time he is not sitting in a congressional hearing room. He is testifying in a Los Angeles courtroom in what multiple outlets describe as a landmark trial over whether social media platforms deliberately addict and harm children.
At the center of the case is a now 20 year old California woman identified as KGM, who says she began compulsively using YouTube as a child and later started scrolling Instagram around age 9. Her lawyers claim that early use “addicted her to the technology” and worsened her depression and suicidal thoughts.
Meta and Google’s YouTube are the two remaining defendants. TikTok and Snap settled before trial. The case is a bellwether, meaning the outcome could influence how thousands of similar lawsuits play out. NPR reported roughly 1,600 other pending social media addiction cases have been consolidated.
Why Zuckerberg Has Been Called to Testify
Zuckerberg’s testimony is being used to answer a blunt question with sweeping consequences: Are social media platforms “defective products” engineered to exploit vulnerabilities in young people’s brains.
Plaintiffs argue that Meta’s design choices and internal goals were aimed at making apps hard to put down, using features like infinite scroll, auto play, likes, beauty filters, and push notifications. During opening statements, plaintiff lawyer Mark Lanier said, “These companies built machines designed to addict the brains of children. And they did it on purpose.” He also described social media services as “digital casinos” designed to hook young people.
This is also not just one courtroom fight. CNN reported that if the companies lose, they could face potentially billions in damages and be forced to make changes to platforms that shape daily life for millions.
Zuckerberg’s Core Denial: Not Intentionally Addicting Minors
On the stand, Zuckerberg denied that Meta intentionally designed Instagram features to be addictive. He rejected the idea that features such as infinite scroll and autoplay were intentionally built to hook users and said Meta has worked to improve safety.
When asked whether people tend to use something more if it is addictive, Zuckerberg responded, “I’m not sure what to say to that. I don’t think that applies here.”
He also leaned on the company’s stated age policy, emphasizing that children under 13 are prohibited from using Meta platforms and that underage accounts are removed when identified. During a tense exchange about age verification, Zuckerberg said, “I don’t see why this is so complicated,” and repeated that the policy restricts users under 13 and that Meta tries to detect people who lie about their ages.
The Background Allegation: Time, Algorithms, and Features That Keep Kids Scrolling
The allegation is not simply that teenagers spend too long online. It is that the product was shaped to maximize engagement, especially among vulnerable users, because attention is the business model.
Lanier framed it in moral terms from the start, laying out three options for how powerful institutions treat vulnerable people: help them, ignore them, or “prey upon them and use them for our own ends.” Zuckerberg said he agrees the last option is not what a reasonable company should do, adding, “I think a reasonable company should try to help the people that use its services.”
But plaintiffs say internal documents show a different reality. NPR reported that lawyers for parents point to internal documents stressing a goal of making social media apps difficult to put down through features like infinite scroll, auto play, likes, beauty filters, and push notifications.
CNN described another pressure point: an internal document from 2015 that estimated more than 4 million Instagram users were under 13, representing “30% of all 10 to 12 year olds in the US.” CNN also reported that Instagram did not begin requiring new users to enter a birthdate until December 2019, and began prompting existing users for a birthdate in August 2021. That matters because the plaintiff says she began using Instagram at age 9 and “wasn’t asked for her age at all when she joined the platform.”
Social Media Is Addictive
The loudest voices in this case are the plaintiffs and parents, and they are not alone.
NPR quoted Lanier saying the companies built machines designed to addict children on purpose.
Outside the courtroom, grieving families and advocates are also publicly condemning Meta. CNN quoted Julianna Arnold, who traces the death of her 17 year old daughter to Instagram, saying, “The intention of the company was to prey on teens … exploit them so they can make greater profits. That was done intentionally, not by accident.”
AP reported that children’s advocates slammed Zuckerberg’s testimony as disingenuous. Josh Golin, executive director of Fairplay, said, “All Mark Zuckerberg accomplished with his testimony today was to prove yet again that he cannot be trusted, especially when it comes to kids’ safety.” Golin also pointed to disputed features, saying executives prevented Instagram from getting rid of things like visible like counts and plastic surgery filters, calling them “by their very nature addictive.”
The Cases Cited
The central case is KGM. Her claim is that compulsive use of YouTube and Instagram worsened depression and suicidal thoughts. Jurors are expected to hear from her later in the trial.
CNN added specific details that underline the compulsive use claim. Lanier said the plaintiff sometimes used Instagram for “several hours a day” and was once on the platform for more than 16 hours in a single day despite her mother’s attempts to curb her use. CNN also reported the plaintiff claims the platform’s addictive features contributed to anxiety, body dysmorphia, and suicidal thoughts, along with experiences of bullying and sextortion on Instagram.
In court, Lanier used a dramatic prop to hammer home the point, presenting a poster sized collage of hundreds of photos the plaintiff had posted to Instagram. The New York Times described a 50 foot collage of selfies, many using beauty filters.
Zuckerberg has testified before Congress about youth safety and apologized to families at a past hearing whose lives were upended by tragedies they believe were linked to social media. AP noted that he told parents he was “sorry for everything you have all been through,” but he “stopped short of taking direct responsibility.” (AP)
The broader criticism is that Meta’s public posture does not match what internal materials and product choices suggest. The New York Times reported that Meta’s communications staff worked to curate Zuckerberg’s public image, advising him to sound more “human” than “robotic,” and showing internal guidance telling him to be “authentic, direct, human, insightful and real,” and not “fake, robotic, corporate or cheesy.” Zuckerberg pushed back, saying it was “just giving feedback,” and added, “I think I’m actually well known to be sort of bad at this.” (AP; NYT)
That is part of what makes this moment combustible. The platform is accused of behaving like an engagement machine, while its leader insists the company is simply building value.
Not a Traditional Addiction, Still Designed to Hook
This trial forces an uncomfortable reality into daylight. Social media may not fit the old model of chemical addiction, and Meta’s side is leaning on that distinction. AP reported that Instagram head Adam Mosseri said he disagrees with the idea that people can be clinically addicted to social media platforms. (AP)
But the plaintiffs are not arguing about chemistry. They are arguing about design.
Zuckerberg’s defense leans heavily on the idea of usefulness. When pressed on internal goals aimed at increasing time spent on Meta’s platforms, Zuckerberg said the company no longer relies on those metrics and claimed they are not the best measure of success. He said the company moved away from time based goals and now focuses on “utility.” He described a “basic assumption” that “if something is valuable, people will use it more because it’s useful to them.”
Critics hear that and see a dodge. In their view, a sophisticated content system built on feedback loops can drive compulsive behavior even if it does not look like a drug dependency. And because attention is what sells ads, the incentive is obvious: keep people scrolling.
A Jury Will Decide Whether Meta Did Enough and Whether Zuckerberg’s Denials Hold
Meta says it “strongly disagrees” with the allegations and is “confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people.” Meta’s lawyer Paul Schmidt said the company does not dispute that KGM experienced mental health struggles, but disputes that Instagram was a substantial factor, pointing to medical records showing a turbulent home life. YouTube’s side made similar arguments, saying the platforms were used as a coping mechanism rather than the cause. (AP)
But the families in the room are not watching this like a technical debate. They are watching it like a moral trial.
NPR quoted one mother, Julianna Arnold, saying families cannot get their kids back but can warn others and push for guardrails: “These platforms are dangerous and that we need to put guardrails on these companies,” she said, adding, “And they cannot just do whatever they want when they want, how they want.” (NPR)
That is what Zuckerberg is up against now: not just questions about features and policies, but the growing belief that Meta built a system to capture kids’ attention, then tried to explain it away as value.
NP Editor: Zuckerberg is lying. Yes, Facebook content is designed to be addictive, that is the holy grail of advertising models.
Thing about the worst, most obnoxious of memes and slogans that have stuck in your head since you were a child. And then thing about a machine that not only discovers and feeds you these memes and slogans, but customizes them to you and then puts them in combinations that make you even more hooked. And of course when you get these, there is a small increase in dopamine levels.
Yes, addictive.
But social media is not the only addictive situation, computer games are also addictive, as are sugary, caffeinated sodas. Addictions are a good investment.
