Landmark trial in New Mexico to decide whether Meta misled users about childrens safety risks
SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — Closing arguments began Monday in the social media conglomerate’s landmark trial in New Mexico. Meta It is accused of misleading its users about how safe its platforms are for children.
Jurors will consider the case after six weeks of deliberations and testimony from scores of witnesses, including local teachers, psychiatric experts, state investigators, top Meta officials and whistleblowers who have left the company.
The case in New Mexico state court is among the first to go to trial in a wave of lawsuits over social media platforms and their effects on children.
New Mexico prosecutors I blamed Meta The company, which owns Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp, is choosing profit over safety, violating state consumer protection laws. They expressed concerns about the security of complex algorithms and various messaging features and settings.
Prosecuting attorney Linda Singer told the jury in her closing statement: “It is clear that the young people spent so much time on Meta products that they lost control.” “Meta knew this and did not disclose it.”
At the same time, Singer said testimony and evidence at the hearing showed that Meta’s algorithms recommended sensationalist and harmful content to young people and failed to truly enforce the minimum user age of 13.
“The safety issues you heard about in this case were not mistakes. … They were the product of a corporate philosophy that prioritized growth and inclusion over the safety of children,” Singer said. “And young people in this state and across the country have paid the price.”
Meta’s lawyers dispute the allegations and say: company Includes protections for juveniles and weeds harmful contentIt also acknowledges that some potentially harmful posts have bypassed security networks.
Singer urged jurors to impose a maximum penalty of $5,000 per violation for two consumer protection violations and more than $2 billion in civil penalties against Meta, based on an estimated 208,700 monthly Meta platform users under the age of 18 in New Mexico.
“Over the course of a decade, Meta has repeatedly failed to act with integrity, transparency, and failure to take action to protect young people in this state,” Singer said. “It’s up to you to finish this job.”
The second phase of the trial continues with the judge deciding whether Meta is a public nuisance and whether he should be financially strapped to fund programs to address alleged harm to children.
Attorney General Raúl Torrez filed a lawsuit in 2023, accusing Meta of creating a marketplace and “breeding ground” for predators who target children for sexual exploitation and of failing to disclose what he knew about these harmful effects. State investigators created social media accounts posing as children to document online sexual harassment and Meta’s response.
Meta lawyers said the company was honest with platform users about diligent but flawed efforts to enforce bans on child sexual abuse material. They also accuse prosecutors of haphazardly collecting evidence and conducting a shoddy investigation.
Meta executives emphasized at the hearing that the company is constantly improving security and addressing coercive social media use without infringing on freedom of expression or censoring users.
But on Monday, the prosecutor’s office said public assurances about security disclosures by Meta executives, including Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram President Adam Mosseri, often did not match internal workings and communications at the company.
“This was included in Meta’s internal research — again, this was research that was not disclosed by Meta — that one in three teens had experienced problematic use,” Singer said. “They knew that these kids were struggling with problematic use, also struggling with addiction.”
A jury of residents of Santa Fe County, including the politically progressive state capital, will decide whether Meta violated the state’s Unfair Practices Act on two counts, including “unconscionable” business practices.
Detection of willful violations will lead to potential fines of up to $5,000 per violation. While prosecutors said it could run into billions of dollars, Meta said he would seek a different calculation.
Technology companies were shielded from liability for material published on social media platforms. Chapter 230A 30-year-old provision of the U.S. Communications Decency Act and a First Amendment shield.
Prosecutors say New Mexico did not seek to hold Meta accountable for the content on its platforms, but instead took on the role of pushing out that content through complex algorithms that amplified material that could be addictive and harmful to children.
In California, a jury is already deliberating on this issue. Whether Meta and YouTube will be liable for harm caused to children using its platforms. The pioneering lawsuit could influence how thousands of similar lawsuits against social media companies play out.
