Instagram Chief Denies App Addiction in US Tech Trial
- Los Angeles – A landmark trial examining the potential harms of social media on young people is underway in Los Angeles, with the head of Instagram, Adam Mosseri,...
- Mosseri’s testimony, delivered on Wednesday, marks the first time an executive from a major social media company has taken the stand in a case of this nature.
- During questioning by Mark Lanier, the plaintiff’s lawyer, Mosseri was pressed on whether Instagram prioritizes profits over the safety of minors and whether the app is designed to...
Los Angeles – A landmark trial examining the potential harms of social media on young people is underway in Los Angeles, with the head of Instagram, Adam Mosseri, testifying that he does not believe users can become “clinically addicted” to the platform. The case, brought by a 20-year-old woman identified as Kaley, alleges that Instagram and its parent company, Meta, intentionally designed addictive features to hook young users, leading to mental health issues.
Mosseri’s testimony, delivered on , marks the first time an executive from a major social media company has taken the stand in a case of this nature. The lawsuit is one of more than 1,500 similar cases seeking to hold social media giants accountable for the well-being of their young users, and its outcome could set a significant precedent.
During questioning by Mark Lanier, the plaintiff’s lawyer, Mosseri was pressed on whether Instagram prioritizes profits over the safety of minors and whether the app is designed to be intentionally captivating for younger audiences. The exchange offered a rare glimpse into the internal thinking of Instagram’s leadership regarding its business practices.
Mosseri acknowledged he had not previously testified in a trial setting. He maintained that while “clinical addiction” to Instagram is unlikely, “problematic use” is possible, varying from individual to individual. He drew a comparison to watching television for extended periods, suggesting that excessive use, while potentially unhealthy, doesn’t necessarily equate to a clinical addiction. He conceded under questioning that he is not a medical professional.
“It’s relative,” Mosseri stated. “Yes, for an individual, there’s a such thing as using Instagram more than you feel good about.”
The trial coincides with a vigil held on by parents who have lost children to alleged harms linked to social media, highlighting the growing public concern over the impact of these platforms on youth mental health.
The legal strategy employed by the plaintiffs draws parallels to litigation against the tobacco industry in the 1990s and 2000s. Similar arguments were made then, alleging that companies knowingly sold harmful products and concealed the risks. Lanier, in his opening statement on , accused the tech companies of creating “traps” rather than simply developing apps, claiming they engineered “an addiction in the brains of children.” He presented internal documents from Google and Meta as evidence of intentional design choices aimed at maximizing user engagement.
Lanier asserted that Meta and YouTube operate on an “addictive strategy,” emphasizing that their business models rely heavily on advertising revenue, which is directly tied to the amount of time users spend on their platforms. Mosseri countered this claim, stating that Instagram generates less revenue from younger users due to their lower engagement with advertisements.
Defense counsel, Paul Schmidt, argued that the plaintiff’s mental health struggles are primarily rooted in her family situation and experiences with bullying, suggesting that these factors, rather than Instagram use, are the primary cause of her distress. He questioned whether removing Instagram from the plaintiff’s life would fundamentally alter her circumstances, or if she would continue to grapple with the same underlying issues.
The trial is expected to include testimony from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg on , and YouTube CEO Neil Mohan on . Their appearances are anticipated to draw significant media attention and provide further insight into the companies’ perspectives on the issue of social media addiction and its impact on young people.
The case against Alphabet and Meta follows a similar suit brought against TikTok, which was settled out of court shortly before the trial began. The outcome of this trial could have far-reaching implications for the social media industry, potentially leading to increased regulation and greater accountability for the mental health impacts of these platforms.