Did Meta “bait” children on Instagram and Facebook by “hiding the truth”, or task its teams with identifying and resolving excessive usage problems? The first federal trial against the social media giant opened Tuesday in Oakland, near San Francisco, with two irreconcilable stories.
“Meta, one of the largest and most powerful companies in the world, has waged a campaign to deceive, to mislead its users, legislators, teachers and parents,” blasted Megan O’Neill, deputy attorney general of California, before jurors who will examine the case until the end of September.
Meta promotes its anti-addiction tools
“There is no possible dispute about the fact that Meta both recognized that certain people could have difficulty managing their use of social networks and sought to design tools to help them,” replied Paul Schmidt, the group’s lawyer.
Also readMeta facing American justice for the addiction of minors to social networks
The prosecutor described these tools as “tissue paper barriers”, only 0.2% of adolescents having actually used the “take a break” function.
Already convicted twice this year for its impact on minors, Meta is facing four American states here which are demanding nearly $200 billion in penalties and an overhaul of its two flagship applications.
California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey are leading the lawsuit, leading a total of 29 attorneys general who have been suing the Menlo Park group since 2023.
This trial is part of a vast dispute in the United States, which also targets TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube, sued by families, school communities and states for the harmful effects of the platforms.
Exploiting “the weaknesses of human psychology”
Everyone keeps in mind the precedent of tobacco: the four big tobacco companies, whose 1998 transaction to close the lawsuits of dozens of American states has become a historical reference, have since paid more than 176 billion dollars and are still paying 9 billion per year.
“No company, as rich, as influential, as untouchable as it believes itself to be, should be able to place itself above the truth, the law and our children,” Lori Schott, who came to demonstrate in court with other mothers who accuse social networks of having destroyed the mental health of their children, told the media.
The accusation is in three parts: Meta allegedly lied about the harmfulness of its applications for adolescents, designed certain features to retain them, and collected data from children under 13 without parental consent, in violation of a federal law.
See alsoMeta trial: social networks accused of getting young people addicted
For the defense, which disputes any deception, the case boils down to a disagreement over how Meta sought to improve himself.
Prosecutors began the battle by showing internal documents in which employees wrote that the group’s features “exploit the weaknesses of human psychology.”
“This document was written by people whose mission is to ensure that Facebook does not cause harm,” objected Paul Schmidt, describing teams who “identify problems and work to solve them”.
Filters imitating cosmetic surgery on Instagram
The two camps delivered two versions of an episode that has become central to the dispute: the authorization on Instagram of filters imitating cosmetic surgery.
Meta had suspended them, consulted experts who recommended banning them, then Mark Zuckerberg decided to reinstate them in 2020 after being informed of the impact on growth, the accusation argues. No, replies the defense: in the absence of solid data on the dangers, respect for freedom of expression prevailed.
The attorneys general denounced a “diversion” strategy: “They are hanging on to the branches,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said at a press conference.
To conclude the day, Arturo Bejar, a former Meta engineer who became a figure in the families’ struggle, was the first witness interviewed.
When he was hired, he said, the slogan “Move fast and break things” reigned: “We had to get products into the hands of users as quickly as possible; therefore, safety considerations took second place.”
The eight jurors will render an advisory verdict at the end of September or beginning of October. And it is judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, known for having sanctioned Apple and arbitrating the recent trial between Elon Musk and OpenAI, who will decide alone.
Mark Zuckerberg is the announced, but unconfirmed, star witness. His first appearance before a jury, in February in Los Angeles, resulted in a historic conviction, which Meta appealed.
With AFP
