Meta’s Internal Research Shows Its Platforms Are Addictive and Harmful, Still It Targets Teens
Updated
Meta’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, has been questioned in a bellwether social media jury trial alleging that Meta’s platforms (Facebook and Instagram) are designed to be addictive. There are dozens of internal studies conducted by Meta that show the company is aware of the harm caused to children and teens who spend countless hours on the platforms while feeling hopelessly addicted.
During the Los Angeles trial, Zuckerberg said that when something provides value, people tend to use it more. Plaintiff Attorney Mark Lanier responded that people who are addicted to something also tend to increase the amount they use it. Zuckerberg said he didn’t know how to respond to the statement and didn’t know whether it applied to this situation.
Bennett Sippel, Nikolaus Greb, Emma Park, Zach Rausch, and Jonathan Haidt at the Tech and Society Lab at NYU Stern have compiled the internal studies and documents that have been leaked by whistleblowers and through court cases over the years.
One section of an internal Meta study concludes, “Teens are hooked despite how it makes them feel. Instagram is addictive, and time spent on the platform is having a negative impact on mental health.” The same study states, “They have an addicts’ narrative about their Instagram use – it can make them feel good, it can make them feel bad, they wish they could spend less time caring about it, but they can’t help themselves.”
The same study also states, “Young people are acutely aware that Instagram is bad for their mental health, yet are compelled to spend time on the app for fear of missing out on cultural and social trends.” Furthermore, claims related to positive mental health benefits from Instagram usage were shot down by the internal study, which stated, “Constructive uses of the platform for mental wellbeing were hypothetical rather than practical.” That positive, uplifting quote could theoretically improve somebody’s mood, but the study authors were unable to find that the platform could provide social purpose or expand interests.
An internal email from 2017 noted that Zuckerberg’s top priority for the year was “teens.” An internal slideshow from 2020 titled “Teen Fundamentals” has a subcaption stating that they will discuss what teens “need on IG” while incorporating adolescent development concepts, neuroscience, and nearly 80 studies of their own product research.
One slide states, “The teenage brain is usually about 80% mature. The remaining 20% rests in the frontal cortex. At this time, teens are highly dependent on their temporal lobe, where emotions, memory, and learning, and the reward system reign supreme.” The following slide adds that teens are driven by emotion and the “intrigue of novelty and reward.”
Several slides later, it states some “opportunities” to improve Instagram for teens, including “teens need rapid fire discovery features to find new interests, perspectives [and] experiences.” The slide is captioned “Teen’s insatiable appetite for novelty puts them on a persistent quest to discover new means of stimulation.”
This trial has been compared to the 90s litigation against big tobacco companies. Particularly, the fact that Adam Mosseri, the head of Instagram, said during the trial that spending 16 hours a day on Instagram is “problematic,” but denied that it is addictive.
This is called a bellwether trial because it could spawn warnings of addictive behavior and subsequent safeguards against overuse by children and teens. A statement from a Meta employee comparing the company’s behavior to that of Big Tobacco was revealed during the 2025 legislation by school districts against social media companies.
The employee said, “If the results are bad and we don’t publish and they leak, is it going to look like tobacco companies doing research and knowing cigs were bad and then keeping that info to themselves?”
The information that has come out shows the company knows about the unhealthy behavior associated with its platforms, but has continued to focus on ways to increase usage of the platform rather than implementing mental health safeguards to protect children from over-usage.
K.G.M. is the plaintiff in the LA trial against Meta and is also the same plaintiff who received an undisclosed settlement from TikTok in a similar case that closed last month. The outcome of the case could determine what happens with hundreds of other pending cases against social media companies for causing harm to the mental health of children.
The HighWire has reported on the increased screen time and depression in children of all ages and the associated risks that come with social media usage. Anxiety disorders, mood disorders, and attention disorders have all increased alongside the increase in mobile and tablet usage among children of all ages. A Common Sense Media report last year found that 40% of children have their own tablet by the age of two and 58% have their own tablet by the age of four. Last month, a study was released that found that increased screen time for infants is associated with a higher likelihood of anxiety and slower decision-making ability.
Los Angeles County also filed a lawsuit against the gaming platform Roblox for deceptive business practices that endanger and exploit children. 56% of Roblox users are under the age of 16, and the platform has been accused of enabling child sexual predators by having “age-restricted experiences” named after convicted pedophile Jefferey Epstein without proper age verification procedures to protect children. Roblox has also banned vigilante users who were exposing predators on the platform.
