….Zuckerberg, Mosseri expected to testify
…FCCPC previously secured $220m fine against Meta, WhatsApp
By Juliet Umeh
Social media is facing one of its biggest legal tests as Meta Platforms, parent company of Facebook and Instagram, battles 29 US states over allegations that it deliberately designed its platforms in ways that could harm children and teenagers.
The multi-week trial, which opened Tuesday in a federal court in Oakland, California, has placed Meta’s product design, youth safety policies, algorithms and handling of children’s personal data under intense scrutiny.
At the centre of the case are allegations that Meta deliberately designed Facebook and Instagram to make young users spend more time on the platforms, while misleading the public about the potential risks.
The states also accuse the technology giant of improperly collecting and using children’s personal information in violation of federal law.
The bipartisan coalition is led by attorneys general from California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey. The case, filed in 2023, could result in substantial financial penalties and force Meta to make changes to the way its platforms operate.
An eight-member jury will hear the evidence and provide an advisory view, while US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will ultimately decide the case.
The states are seeking as much as $200 billion in damages, while Meta has argued in court filings that potential exposure could theoretically reach $1.4 trillion. The judge has reportedly described Meta’s estimate as unreasonable.
Beyond financial penalties, the states are seeking changes to Meta’s platforms, including restrictions on children’s access and modifications to features such as infinite scrolling, notifications and other mechanisms designed to encourage prolonged engagement.
Meta rejects allegations
Meta has rejected the allegations, maintaining that it has invested heavily in protecting young people on its platforms.
The company argues that the states have not demonstrated a direct causal link between use of its platforms and the alleged mental health harms, or shown that Meta deliberately misled consumers.
Meta is also expected to argue that many of the features being challenged are common across the social media industry and should not, by themselves, constitute evidence of wrongdoing.
A Meta spokesperson said the states’ claims were unsubstantiated and their financial demands disproportionate, while stressing the company’s record of creating protections for teenagers.
The trial is expected to last several weeks and could put Meta’s top executives directly in the spotlight.
Meta founder and Chief Executive Officer, Mark Zuckerberg, and Instagram head, Adam Mosseri, are expected to testify, alongside current and former employees and other witnesses.
Their evidence could offer insight into how the company assessed the risks associated with its platforms, how internal research was interpreted and how decisions were made about features intended to increase engagement.
How the case began
The lawsuit followed a multi-state investigation into the impact of Facebook and Instagram on children and teenagers.
The investigation gained momentum following disclosures by former Meta employee and whistleblower Frances Haugen, who testified before the US Senate in 2021 that the company had internal information indicating that its products could harm young users.
Her disclosures triggered intense scrutiny of Meta’s internal research and its approach to youth safety.
The states subsequently accused Meta of using product features that encouraged children and teenagers to remain on its platforms for extended periods.
The case is therefore going beyond the question of whether harmful content appears on social media. It is examining the design of the platforms themselves.
The states are expected to rely on internal documents, research and testimony to argue that Meta knew about the potential risks and failed to adequately address them.
Features including personalised recommendations, infinite scrolling, notifications and other engagement mechanisms are under particular scrutiny.
A potential turning point for social media
The case has been described as a possible turning point for the global social media industry because a ruling against Meta could go beyond a financial penalty.
The states are seeking remedies that could require changes to the way Facebook and Instagram are designed and operated.
That could have implications for Meta’s advertising-driven business model because the company’s recommendation systems are central to keeping users engaged and generating opportunities to serve advertising.
Analysts cited by a media report said the case could lead to significant changes in social media usage, although experts also cautioned against assuming that a ruling would destroy Meta or the wider industry.
The trial also comes after other legal setbacks for Meta.
Earlier this year, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and YouTube liable in a case involving an individual young claimant and awarded $6 million. Meta also faced a separate case in New Mexico that resulted in a $942 million penalty relating to allegations concerning child sexual exploitation on its platforms.
The growing litigation suggests that technology companies are increasingly being asked to defend not only the content appearing on their platforms, but the systems that determine what users see and how long they remain engaged.
Nigeria angle
While the latest battle is unfolding in California, the questions being raised have growing relevance for Nigeria, where social media platforms have become deeply embedded in everyday communication, commerce, news distribution and political engagement.
Meta’s Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp have millions of Nigerian users, making questions around consumer protection, data privacy, platform accountability and the power of large technology companies increasingly important for the country.
Indeed, Nigeria has already taken regulatory action against Meta.
In April 2025, the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal upheld the $220 million penalty imposed by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, FCCPC, on Meta and WhatsApp following a joint investigation into their conduct, privacy practices and consumer data policies. The tribunal also awarded $35,000 to the FCCPC as the cost of investigation.
The Nigerian case involved allegations of discriminatory and exploitative practices affecting consumers, and the tribunal affirmed the FCCPC’s authority and actions on most of the contested issues.
Nigeria is now widening its scrutiny of major technology platforms.
The Federal Government has directed the FCCPC to investigate Meta, Google, X and generative artificial intelligence companies over allegations of anti-competitive practices and the exploitation of Nigerian media content.
The directive followed a joint petition by the Nigerian Press Organisation, comprising the Newspaper Proprietors’ Association of Nigeria, the Nigeria Union of Journalists, the Broadcasting Organisations of Nigeria and the Guild of Corporate Online Publishers.
The petition raised concerns over market dominance, alleged unauthorised scraping and commercial use of copyrighted news content for training generative AI models, as well as the absence of fair commercial agreements between global technology companies and Nigerian publishers.
FCCPC Executive Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Tunji Bello, said the commission would conduct an independent, transparent and evidence-based investigation.
He said the inquiry should not be interpreted as a presumption of wrongdoing, stressing that all parties would have an opportunity to present their positions before any conclusion was reached.
The commission is expected to determine whether any conduct breached the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018 or other applicable laws.
This means Meta is facing scrutiny on multiple fronts in Nigeria, just as it confronts the much larger US litigation over its treatment of young users.
What the US case could mean for Nigeria
The California trial could therefore have implications beyond the United States.
If the US states succeed in forcing Meta to modify features such as recommendation algorithms, infinite scrolling, notifications or age-related controls, regulators in other jurisdictions could come under greater pressure to examine similar practices.
For Nigeria, this could strengthen the argument for more detailed scrutiny of how global platforms protect children, process personal data and design products for Nigerian users.
It could also raise questions about whether Nigerian regulators have sufficient data, technical capacity and enforcement mechanisms to independently assess the impact of platform design on Nigerian children.
The issue is particularly important as Nigerian children and teenagers gain greater access to smartphones, social networking platforms and online services.
Unlike traditional media, where regulators can examine identifiable content, social media platforms operate through algorithms that personalise users’ experiences. Two people using the same platform may therefore receive very different content based on their behaviour, interests and previous interactions.
That makes platform design and algorithmic accountability increasingly important areas for regulators.
The Meta case could consequently provide a global test of a fundamental question: how much responsibility should technology companies bear for the consequences of the systems they build to maximise user engagement?
From child safety to platform accountability
For Meta, the immediate concern is the potential financial cost of the litigation.
But the bigger risk may be regulatory and operational.
A court order requiring fundamental changes to Facebook and Instagram could influence how the company develops products for young users in markets around the world.
For governments, meanwhile, the case offers a test of whether existing consumer protection and privacy laws are sufficient to regulate technology companies whose products are used by hundreds of millions of people.
Nigeria’s own experience suggests that the country is already moving in that direction.
The FCCPC’s previous action against Meta demonstrated that Nigerian regulators are willing to challenge the practices of global technology companies. Its latest investigation into Meta, Google, X and AI companies expands that scrutiny from consumer and data issues to competition and the economic relationship between technology platforms and Nigerian content producers.
As Zuckerberg, Mosseri and other Meta witnesses face questioning in California, the proceedings could therefore become more than another legal dispute involving a US technology giant.
They could help shape a new global regulatory conversation around social media: one in which the responsibility of platforms is judged not only by what users post, but by how the platforms themselves are engineered.
For Nigeria, the outcome could provide important lessons as the country seeks to balance digital innovation and access with consumer protection, children’s safety, data privacy, fair competition and the sustainability of its own digital ecosystem.
The post Media under pressure: Battles 29 US states over alleged Facebook, Instagram harm to children appeared first on Vanguard News.