US court upholds case accusing Meta of addicting children to Facebook and Instagram

Social networks are forced to suspend accounts that show children
A United States federal judge rejected Meta Platforms' request to end a lawsuit brought by attorneys general from 29 US states. They accuse the company of developing Facebook and Instagram in a way that makes children and teenagers dependent on the platforms and of knowingly hiding the harm caused to the public.
In the decision, released on Monday night (29), federal judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, of Oakland, California, denied Meta's request to dismiss the charges related to deceptive practices, unfair commercial practices and violations of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act - COPPA).
The judge also concluded that Meta did not comply with the law's requirements regarding parental notification and obtaining parental consent. For this reason, it granted summary judgment in favor of the states at this specific point in the case.
In a statement, Meta stated: "We strongly disagree with these allegations and are confident that the evidence will demonstrate our long-standing commitment to supporting young people."
Gonzalez Rogers is also responsible for a multi-district class action related to the issue, brought by more than 2,600 people, school districts and local governments. The lawsuit discusses whether platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Google, YouTube, Snapchat and TikTok were designed to generate addiction in children and teenagers.
READ MORE
The 4 lawsuits in the US that could change the way social networks operate
Meta minimizes the damage
The states argue that research shows that the use of Facebook and Instagram by children and teenagers can contribute to depression, anxiety, insomnia, harm to education and daily routine, as well as self-harming behaviors and even suicide.
Meta responded that attorneys general did not present evidence that the company misled consumers about the alleged addictive nature of its platforms, including in testimony given to Congress by CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
The company, based in Menlo Park, California, also argued that "social media addiction" is not an officially recognized psychiatric condition. Therefore, according to Meta, statements that its platforms are not addictive could not be considered false.
In addition, the company stated that it did not violate children's privacy legislation because Facebook and Instagram are aimed at the general public, and not specifically at children under 13.
Logo of Instagram, Meta, and TikTok.
Reuters
Judge sees dispute of facts about addictive potential of the platforms
In the 38-page decision, Gonzalez Rogers stated that there are relevant controversies that must be analyzed in the process, including whether Meta's platforms are, in fact, addictive, whether the company falsely denied that they were designed that way and whether the services are aimed, at least in part, at children.
According to the judge, the attorneys general presented a reasonable interpretation of Meta's statements that Facebook and Instagram were not developed to lead teenagers to compulsively use the platforms to the detriment of their own well-being.
She wrote that, if the evidence of authors demonstrate that the platforms were indeed designed for this purpose, a jury could conclude that these statements were false to a reasonable person.
According to court records, the trial of the lawsuits filed by the states of California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey against Meta is scheduled for August 18.

Source: G1