GoKawiilThe trial started off on Tuesday with a battle of words and facts.
Paul Schmidt, a lead attorney for Meta in the trial, directly addressed an internal research report that Megan O'Neill, a lead attorney for California, made part of the states' opening arguments.
The Meta document O'Neill showed the jury found that "1 in 5 teens says Instagram makes them feel worse".
Schmidt said: "That sounds pretty bad."
"What else does the document say?" Schmidt went on. "That 41% of teens said it made them feel better and another 41% said it had no effect."
Schmidt also worked to poke holes in the states' argument that Meta had not only failed to stop users under the age of 13 from using its platforms, but that it intentionally "hooked" teens and children as users of Facebook and Instagram, or that they were designed to be addictive.
As for Meta being able to verify the age of every user on its platform, Schmidt argued that the very privacy laws Meta was being accused of violating in the case prevent it from saving and using the data it would need to effectively track underage users.
When it comes to addiction, Schmidt argued a point that Meta has put forward in at other litigation this year: that social media addiction does not exist.
"There can be no dispute that Meta has recognised people struggle, or can struggle, with their use of social media, and has come up with tools to try and address that," Schmidt said.
Yet, he pointed to past statements from chief executive Mark Zuckerberg and head of Instagram Adam Mosseri that not only were Facebook and Instagram not designed to be addictive, scientific research has not yet come to support the idea that an addiction to social media is possible.
... continue reading