Social media conglomerate Meta was found liable on Tuesday for failing to safeguard kids' safety on its platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp.
The nearly seven-week trial ended this week when a New Mexico jury determined that Meta violated parts of the state's Unfair Practices Act. In the civil trial, accusations were made against the company that said Meta hid what it knew about the dangers of child sexual exploitation on its platforms and prioritized profits over the positive mental health of children.
Due to its findings, jurors decided that Meta should pay $375 million in damages for its number of violations.
Zuckerberg's testimony
In the trial, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified about the years-old claims that social media harms kids' mental health. On the stand, he said he believes he has navigated the safety of young users “in a reasonable way.”
Regarding social media's addictive nature, Zuckerberg was asked whether a company should “prey upon” people who come from difficult backgrounds or are “less fortunate in educational opportunities.”
He said, “I think a reasonable company should try to help the people who use its services."
He also talked about the theory that Meta set goals to maximize time spent on the app. Though Zuckerberg noted that time-specific goals existed “earlier on in the company,” he said Meta then started prioritizing “utility and value.”
“There’s a basic assumption I have that if something is valuable, then people will do it more,” he said on the stand.
Meta's decision to implement "beauty" filters on Instagram was also brought up in the trial. It was argued that those filters, which allow users to look like they're wearing makeup, can be harmful to a young person's mental health.
However, Zuckerberg explained that those filters were created by users and are not promoted in the app.
“I thought the balance of free expression should allow people to make those filters, but that we shouldn’t create those filters ourselves,” he said. He added that “experts in free expression” were also consulted on that decision, but said he didn’t know their names and hadn’t met with them.
Social media weighs in
On X, people weighed in on the landmark decision and said they were happy that Meta was being forced to take accountability for its effect on young people.
"Finally, some validation for parents who have been shouting about this for years. It’s not just about 'bad content', it’s about the algorithms being designed to keep kids addicted despite the mental health risks," someone wrote. "This changes the conversation for good."
Another said, "This is a significant verdict. The argument that platforms knowingly withheld how damaging their product was to kids is one that was always going to land eventually. Likely just the beginning of a much bigger wave."
However, some social media users thought that the verdict wouldn't change anything at all and that Meta should be given a heftier penalty than just a fine.
"And the guilty verdict means…….Meta has to pay MONEY. A fine. No one goes to jail," they said. "No real consequences. They will keep finding ways to harm and exploit people, especially the most vulnerable."
Another wrote, "Zero arrests."
There were also some people who thought that parents should be more accountable for their children's actions than Meta.
"How about personal accountability? As a parent, one must be a clear participant and present in all aspects of parenting. Children DO NOT need to be on social media without parental guidance...," a concerned X user wrote.
Another said, "Why don’t parents parent?"
A third added, "Mental health issues existed before the net."
The internet is chaotic—but we’ll break it down for you in one daily email. Sign up for the Daily Dot’s newsletter here.
