Adam Mosseri, head of Instagram, faced intense scrutiny in a Los Angeles courtroom on 11 February 2026, defending the platform against claims it fuels youth mental health crises through addictive design features. The trial, pitting a 20-year-old plaintiff against Meta Platforms (Instagram’s parent company) and Google’s YouTube, marks a pivotal moment in lawsuits alleging social media harms minors. Mosseri’s testimony, the first from a top executive, rejected the notion of “clinical addiction” while acknowledging “problematic use”.
Trial Background and Key Players
The case centres on “K.G.M.”, a 20-year-old woman who alleges Instagram’s attention-grabbing features, such as infinite scrolling, hooked her from a young age, exacerbating mental health issues, including self-harm ideation. Her lawyers argue internal Meta documents reveal awareness of harms to vulnerable teens, with one study showing that those facing life difficulties are most prone to excessive use, and parents are lacking controls.
Meta’s defence, voiced by attorney Paul Schmidt, attributes the plaintiff’s struggles to pre-existing family challenges, citing therapist testimonies that downplay Instagram’s role. A Meta spokesperson emphasised: “The jury’s task is to determine whether Instagram significantly contributed to the plaintiff’s mental health issues; she faced numerous substantial challenges long before social media.” Mark Zuckerberg is slated to testify in the coming weeks, heightening the stakes for hundreds of similar US suits potentially worth billions.
Mosseri’s Key Testimony on Addiction
Under cross-examination by plaintiff’s attorney Mark Lanier, Mosseri firmly stated he does not believe people can become “clinically addicted” to Instagram, distinguishing it from true addiction known to someone “very close” to him. He described “problematic use” as spending more time on the app than feels comfortable, akin to binge-watching television: “It’s relative… Yes, for an individual, there’s such a thing as using more than you feel good about.”
Lanier pressed Mosseri on whether Instagram prioritises profits over minors’ safety, highlighting past quotes where he casually used “addiction” in a podcast. Mosseri clarified he spoke non-expertly then, insisting: “It’s not beneficial for the company, in the long run, to make choices that are profitable for us but detrimental to people’s wellbeing.” He defended features as tools for user control, not harm.
Allegations of Harmful App Design
Plaintiffs pointed to Meta’s internal research flagging Instagram’s recommendation of self-harm, self-injury, and body image content to teen accounts, potentially worsening poor mental health or suicidal thoughts. Critics argue that addictive algorithms keep children online longer, exposing them to danger despite known risks. Mosseri, leading Instagram since 2018, faced questions on executive decisions favouring growth over safety.
Meta dismissed such reports as “misleading, dangerously speculative”, claiming they misrepresent teen safety efforts like parental controls and usage limits. The company highlighted ongoing feature improvements to curb problematic use, though plaintiffs contend these came too late.
Broader Implications for Social Media Firms
This trial follows settlements by TikTok and Snap, leaving Meta and YouTube as defendants in a case that could redefine liability for youth mental health harms. A win for plaintiffs might spur stricter regulations, forcing platforms to overhaul algorithms and designs amid rising teen anxiety and depression linked to social media in studies.
Experts view it as a bellwether for over 1,000 lawsuits, with potential billions in damages influencing global policies. Meta maintains its “longstanding commitment to supporting young people”, investing in wellbeing tools. Yet, Mosseri’s stance—that no clinical addiction exists—has drawn ire from advocates decrying profit-driven designs.
Reactions from Legal Teams and Experts
Plaintiff’s counsel Matthew Bergman hailed the testimony as proof that executives “made a conscious decision to prioritise growth over the safety of minors”, citing evidence of ignored risks. Meta countered that discussions were proactive problem-solving, not admissions of fault.
Legal analysts predict the jury’s addiction verdict will shape future cases, with Mosseri’s measured responses potentially bolstering Meta’s position. A parallel New Mexico trial underscores mounting pressure on tech giants.
Future of Youth Mental Health on Social Media
As testimony continues, the case spotlights tensions between innovation and responsibility. Platforms face calls for age verification, content curbs, and transparency on algorithms. Mosseri’s defence underscores industry’s view: tools empower users, but individual circumstances drive issues.
Outcomes could mandate redesigns, impacting 2.5 billion Instagram users worldwide. For now, the trial amplifies debates on digital wellbeing, urging parents and regulators to act amid evolving tech landscapes.
