Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg took the stand in a California courtroom on Thursday, addressing accusations that his social media platforms are engineered to captivate young minds. This pivotal trial scrutinizes the potential addictive nature of these platforms, particularly among children.

Facing evidence from 2015 showing millions of Instagram users below the age of 13, Zuckerberg asserted that the company has made strides in age verification and is committed to introducing additional safeguards as technology evolves.

This appearance marked Zuckerberg’s first testimony before a jury concerning the safety protocols of his major platforms, including Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp.

When questioned about internal concerns over inadequate measures to restrict underage users, Zuckerberg acknowledged past shortcomings but emphasized progress. “I always wish that we could have gotten there sooner,” he admitted.

During the trial, jurors also reviewed emails from 2014 and 2015. These communications revealed Zuckerberg’s interest in increasing user engagement time on Instagram, shedding light on the company’s past strategies.

The jurors in the court were also shown emails from 2014 and 2015, in which Zuckerberg mentioned a target for increasing the time spent on Instagram.

The CEO of Meta acknowledged that the company previously had these types of goals, but has now changed its approach.

In the courtroom, an Agence France-Presse news agency journalist reported that Zuckerberg seemed very reserved at first, but he soon showed signs of annoyance, shaking his head and waving his hands as he looked toward the jury.

Who is suing the social media platforms?

The trial centres on a 20-year-old woman in California, identified as Kaley GM. She started using YouTube at six and joined Instagram at 11, before moving on to Snapchat and TikTok two or three years later

She alleges Facebook and Instagram parent company, Meta, and YouTube parent company, Google, are intentionally designing addictive platforms.

GM alleges she became addicted to the platforms at a young age because of their attention-grabbing design. She alleges the apps fuelled her depression and suicidal thoughts, according to court filings.

During the first court session, her lawyer Mark Lanier told the jurors: “These companies built machines designed to addict the brains of children, and they did it on purpose.”

Meta and Google have denied the allegations.

Why is this a landmark trial?

Zuckerberg’s court appearance on social media addiction allegations is not the only reason this trial is different.

The case is the first of several expected to go to trial this year that centre on what the plaintiffs call “social media addiction” among children.

Matt Bergman, attorney for the plaintiff and founder of the Social Media Victims Law Center, said it will be the first time the tech giants must defend themselves at trial over alleged harm caused by their products.

“We are writing on a legal tabula rasa,” he told Reuters.

Legal experts see the lawsuit as a test case for similar claims in a broader group of cases against social media companies, with thousands of lawsuits in the US accusing the companies of fuelling a youth mental health crisis.

The case is also the first among several “bellwether trials”, a legal term referring to test cases that aim to evaluate a highly debated issue.

What has happened until now?

The trial started 9 February, where in his opening remarks, Lanier told the Jury that Meta and Google “don’t only build apps; they build traps”.

Three days later, Instagram CEO Adam Mosseri appeared in court, rejecting the claims that users can clinically get addicted to social media.

“I think it’s important to differentiate between clinical addiction and problematic use,” he said.

In the trial, YouTube’s attorney also argued that the platform was neither deliberately addictive nor technically classified as social media.

What’s next?

It’s anticipated the jury will determine whether YouTube and Instagram are responsible for the mental health issues experienced by GM in late March.

US federal law mainly exempts platforms like Instagram from legal liability for user-generated content, a law that tech companies claim provides them protection in GM’s case.

However, a verdict against the social media companies would put a crack in that defence, impacting a wave of similar cases in the US.

— With additional reporting by Reuters and Agence France-Presse.

For the latest from SBS News, download our app and subscribe to our newsletter.