Meta Trial Opens Over Claims Instagram, Facebook Addict Youth

Thirty US states have brought Meta to trial over claims that its Instagram and Facebook platforms harm young users through addictive design features. The case, which opened with statements on Tuesday in California, alleges violations of federal and state privacy laws and seeks damages that could reach into the trillions along with mandated alterations to how the apps function.

The attorneys general argue that elements such as like counts, infinite scrolling, recommendation algorithms, and video autoplay keep minors engaged longer than is healthy. They further contend that the company collects data on users under 13 without proper parental consent and makes it hard for young people to limit their time on the sites. Among the remedies sought are parental verification systems, removal of appearance-altering filters, an end to disappearing posts, and restrictions on multiple accounts.

Meta has rejected the accusations outright. Company statements describe the financial demands as disproportionate and the claims as lacking substantiation under existing law. Executives maintain that the platforms already include tools for age verification and usage limits, and they point to user choice in how people interact with the services.

The scale of the requested changes would reshape core aspects of the apps that millions of teenagers use daily. Features now targeted for removal or restriction developed over years to increase engagement and compete in a crowded market. Forcing their elimination raises questions about whether regulators can effectively redesign private products without reducing the very appeal that draws voluntary users.

Similar pressures have appeared in other jurisdictions, with European authorities examining data practices and some US courts allowing related claims to advance. Yet the current multistate effort stands out for its breadth and the size of the potential penalty, which some estimates place near or above Meta's recent annual revenue.

Critics of expansive government action note that parents already hold primary responsibility for monitoring children's online activity. Tools for setting time limits and reviewing content exist within the platforms, and market competition continues to produce new options for families seeking alternatives. Large-scale litigation that dictates specific interface changes risks unintended effects, including slower innovation and reduced incentives for companies to experiment with safer features on their own.

The trial will test whether the states can prove deliberate exploitation rather than standard business practices aimed at adult and minor users alike. Outcomes could influence how technology firms balance growth with compliance in an environment of increasing regulatory scrutiny.