Meta faces child addiction trial as Kiwi teens question social media ban

Summarised by Centrist

Meta is facing a landmark US trial over claims it deliberately designed Facebook and Instagram to addict children, while New Zealand teenagers say a proposed social media ban for under-16s could be easily bypassed using VPNs, false ages and alternative accounts.

The two developments highlight competing responses to online harm, with US states targeting how platforms are designed while New Zealand considers restricting young people’s access to them.

A coalition of 29 US states is seeking about US$200 billion from Meta over allegations that it misled the public about risks to children and designed features intended to keep younger users online.

The states also allege Meta collected information from children under 13 without parental consent, in breach of federal law.

The federal trial is expected to last six weeks, with a decision possible by October. Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri are expected to testify.

Meta denies the allegations and says it has worked with parents, experts and law enforcement to 

introduce safeguards for children.

The states argue some of those protections, including tools intended to limit screen time, are themselves easy to circumvent. Alongside financial penalties, they are seeking changes to Meta’s platforms, including stronger limits on the time young users can spend on them.

Experts have described the proceedings as social media’s “big tobacco moment”, drawing comparisons with litigation against tobacco companies accused of minimising the health effects of cigarettes.

Stanford law professor Nora Freeman Engstrom said the case could mark “the beginning of a broader reckoning” for Meta. A defeat could force the company to make major changes to Facebook and Instagram.

The trial is the first federal test in a wider group of cases targeting Meta, TikTok, Snapchat and YouTube over alleged harm to young people’s mental health.

In New Zealand, teenagers interviewed about the proposed ban on social media accounts for under-16s predicted the restriction would be difficult to enforce.

They identified VPNs, false birth dates and secondary accounts as obvious ways around age checks. Their responses suggest determined teenagers may simply move to less visible accounts or platforms rather than leave social media altogether.

Supporters of an age restriction argue it would reduce children’s exposure to cyberbullying, addictive feeds and harmful material. Critics question how platforms could reliably verify every user’s age without collecting more identity information and potentially weakening online privacy.

Read more at Hespress and NewstalkZB

Receive our free newsletter here