Meta, facing the trial that could forever change the way social networks are understood

Throughout its history, Facebook (or Meta, as of 2021) has had to face a wide range of legal conflicts of all kinds. From the famous Cambridge Analytica case (2018), focused on the political implications of manipulation on social media, to the fines for anticompetitive behavior imposed by the European Commission, the United Kingdom, and Brazil, the company led by Mark Zuckerberg has, I am afraid, built up considerable courtroom experience.

However, the challenge it now faces is on a much larger scale.

This week marks the start of a trial that could have a decisive impact on Meta’s business and, by extension, on all large-scale social networks.

The lawsuit that could change forever how social networks operate

Given the forcefulness of the complaint in question, I have decided to translate directly and include here some of the most striking parts of the opening section of the text, which lays out the key elements of the case. Specifically, the text focuses on highlighting the negative repercussions that the use of Meta’s social networks (Facebook, Instagram) allegedly had on younger users, once again putting practices such as dark patterns in the spotlight—practices that other bodies, such as the European Commission, are also targeting.

In addition, it accuses Meta not only of failing to act to mitigate that impact, but of trying to distort the situation by misleading public opinion about it. As you will see, the language used is highly aggressive toward the company and, in fact, the opening paragraph of the complaint is already devastating in its criticism of the team led by Mark Zuckerberg over the past several years.

(Below you will find an abridged translation of the beginning of the lawsuit. The statements reproduced correspond to the plaintiffs’ claims, not to facts that have yet been proven in court.)

“Over the last decade, Meta has profoundly altered the psychological and social realities of a generation of young Americans. Meta has harnessed powerful and unprecedented technologies to entice, engage, and ultimately ensnare youth and teens. Its motive is profit, and in seeking to maximize its financial gains, Meta repeatedly misled the public about the substantial dangers of its social media platforms. It has concealed the ways in which these platforms exploit and manipulate its most vulnerable consumers: teenagers and children. It has likewise ignored the extensive harms these platforms have caused to the mental and physical health of our nation’s youth. In doing so, Meta has engaged in, and continues to engage in, deceptive and unlawful conduct in violation of state and federal law.

Meta’s strategy consisted of four parts:

• Through the development of Instagram and Facebook, Meta created a business model centered on maximizing the time and attention that young users devote to its social media platforms.
• Meta designed and implemented harmful and psychologically manipulative product features to induce young users to use its platforms compulsively and for extended periods, while falsely assuring the public that those features were safe and appropriate for them.
• [Text omitted in the public version of the complaint] It routinely published misleading reports boasting of a deceptively low incidence of harm among users.
• Despite compelling internal research, analyses by independent experts, and publicly available data demonstrating that its social media platforms harm young users, Meta continues to refuse to stop using features it knows to be harmful. Instead, it has doubled down on its efforts to misrepresent, conceal, and minimize the impact of those features on the mental and physical health of young users.

First, Meta’s business model is based on maximizing the amount of time young users spend on its social media platforms. Meta specifically targets these users and incentivizes its employees to develop ways to increase the amount of time they spend on its platforms. The more time young users remain on Instagram and Facebook, the more money Meta makes by selling advertising targeted to those users.

Second, consistent with this business model, Meta has developed and refined a set of psychologically manipulative features designed to maximize the amount of time young users spend on its social media platforms. Meta knew that the developing brains of young users are especially vulnerable to certain forms of manipulation and chose to exploit those vulnerabilities through specific features such as:

• Recommendation algorithms that manipulate dopamine.
• “Likes” and other social comparison features that Meta knew harm young users.
• Audiovisual and haptic alerts that incessantly call young users back to Meta’s social media platforms while they are at school and during the night.
• Visual filters known to promote body dysmorphia among young users.
• Content presentation formats, such as infinite scroll, designed to make it harder for young users to self-regulate and disengage from Meta’s platforms.

Despite the strong and extensively researched links between young people’s use of Meta’s social media platforms and psychological and physical harm, Meta has continued to conceal and minimize the adverse effects of its platforms. Research has shown that young people’s use of Meta’s social media platforms is associated with depression, anxiety, insomnia, interference with education and daily life, as well as many other negative outcomes.

Internal studies commissioned by Meta—which remained secret until a whistleblower leaked them—reveal that the company has known for years about the serious harms associated with the time young users spend on its social media platforms. Even so, Meta has continued publicly denying and minimizing these harmful effects while promoting its platforms as safe environments for young users.

Finally, Meta has also failed to meet its obligations under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA, by illegally collecting the personal data of its youngest users without their parents’ permission.

Meta has marketed and directed its social media platforms to children under the age of 13 and has actual knowledge that these children use its platforms. Yet it has refused to obtain—or even attempt to obtain—parental consent before collecting and monetizing their personal data. Likewise, Meta refuses to limit the collection and use of these minors’ personal information, as required by law.”

The major stakes of the trial: facing a historic fine

That is, essentially, the rationale behind this complaint, which will now be decided by a federal court in Oakland, California. It will determine whether Meta must face up to $1.4 trillion in penalties (around €1.2 trillion, with a “t”), a figure close to the company’s market capitalization, with the impact that could have on its finances.

The original lawsuit did not quantify the penalties being sought, but in the pretrial phase, Meta stated that the calculation method proposed by the states could raise civil penalties and disgorgement of profits to that $1.4 trillion figure. It is a maximum-case scenario that the company rejects as disproportionate.

In addition, the plaintiffs, 33 U.S. states represented by their respective attorneys general, are demanding changes to the way Facebook and Instagram operate that could directly affect how all major social networks function.

The trial is expected to last between six and eight weeks, and Mark Zuckerberg is expected to be among the Meta executives who testify.

Repercussions of this case on the social media ecosystem

The major problem this lawsuit poses for the global social media industry is that it directly targets some of the common practices used across all—or almost all—major platforms worldwide. Multiple analysts have pointed out that, if the ruling goes against Meta, it could be seen as a landmark case, opening the door to many more lawsuits against other social networks, in an environment that many are already comparing to the wave of rulings against tobacco companies in the 1990s.

Infinite scroll, push notifications, autoplay videos, and recommendation algorithms designed to maximize engagement and described in the complaint as capable of exploiting reward circuits are at the core of how today’s social networks work and, as you have probably guessed, they share a common denominator: maximizing time spent on the platform.

If a ruling were to force Meta to introduce usage limits, stricter age verification systems, or additional parental controls, other platforms could come under pressure to adopt similar measures, whether due to new lawsuits, regulatory changes, or a desire to reduce their own legal exposure.

And that could drastically reduce the number of hours users spend browsing.

And, in principle, fewer browsing hours means fewer ads seen, fewer ad clicks, and less advertising revenue.

At the same time: another major case underway in Europe

As if that were not enough, Meta has another major sword of Damocles hanging over its head, for reasons very similar to those behind this lawsuit. Last April, the European Commission announced that, preliminarily, Meta is violating the Digital Services Act by failing to prevent children under 13 from using Instagram and Facebook. The legal process still has a long way to go, but the Commission has made clear that the company founded by Mark Zuckerberg is exposed to a fine that could seriously hit its finances: up to €10 billion.

Image: ChatGPT