Mark Zuckerberg made his courtroom debut in a landmark social media addiction trial, positioning Meta’s defense around value, not vice.
“You should try and create something useful … and if you do, people will naturally want to use it.” He added, “To me, the north star is ensuring we’re delivering value and people are having a positive experience. If that happens, people will spend more time with social media.”
Zuckerberg appeared before the Los Angeles Superior Court to face claims that his platforms are engineered to foster addiction.
He compared time spent on social media to other forms of entertainment, like watching TV. “TV hasn’t got better over time but social media has quite a bit.”
The plaintiff argued that it was not because social media had “got better over time,” but that its addictiveness is what drives users to the platform.
When challenged by the plaintiff’s attorney on whether a reasonable company would take advantage of those who use its services, Zuckerberg responded that he thought a reasonable company should try to help its people use its services. He elaborated on that point, saying the company has “evolved over time to add a lot more controls” which led to account removals when the company found users who were under thirteen.
Zuckerberg bolstered his argument by noting that less than 1% of Instagram’s revenue comes from teenagers, emphasizing the demographic has limited purchasing power and is therefore less attractive to advertisers. He argued that, from a business perspective, attracting teenagers is not “meaningful in the short term.”
Zuckerberg’s Meta is just one of the defendants in the case. Google and Meta are just the remaining defendants after TikTok and Snapchat settled prior to the trial.
Snapchat told the Daily Wire that it was “pleased” to have settled the case in “an amicable manner.” Youtube, owned by Google, argues that its platform operates differently from Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat so should not be included in the same litigation. YouTube told the Daily Wire that the allegations it faces are “simply not true.”
The case before the California Supreme Court originated when a 19-year-old woman, referred to as K.G.M. in the trial, argued that social media platforms have knowingly designed their platforms to get younger users addicted. The defense argues that Meta makes its platforms addictive to “maximize young users’ time on their platforms to drive revenue.”
A report released by Common Sense Media found that teenagers spent an average of nine hours on entertainment media per day, while children aged 8-12 spend an average of six hours a day, not including time spent using media for school.
In the coming weeks, Meta’s defense could have an influence on future social-media platform regulation depending on the outcome of the trial.
The courtroom did not allow cameras, and even outlined a ban on glasses that could capture scenes from instead the courtroom. When returning from recess, the Judge Carolyn Kuhl said if anyone has used AI glasses with facial recognition to record jurors “you must delete it or you will be held in contempt of court.”
.png)
.png)
