Meta's 29-state trial exposes profit-over-safety culture, whistleblower says

A former Meta engineering director testified that CEO Mark Zuckerberg created a culture where child safety was secondary to engagement metrics, in a landmark 29-state trial that could force design changes to Facebook and Instagram.

A former Meta engineering director testified Wednesday that CEO Mark Zuckerberg fostered a culture where child safety was secondary to growth, in a landmark 29-state trial that could reshape Facebook and Instagram.

"At the end of the day, it was the company culture that Mark had created that made it so that it was practically impossible to deliver features that addressed the wellbeing and safety issues that we've been talking about," Arturo Béjar, former Meta engineering director and whistleblower, said in federal court in Oakland, California.

Béjar, who worked at Meta from 2009 to 2015 and returned as a consultant from 2019 to 2021, said he interacted with Zuckerberg dozens of times and disputed the CEO's 2021 public denial that Meta prioritized profit over safety. He called features including video autoplay, "like" counters and infinite scroll "inherently unsafe for teenagers" and said safety tools such as Instagram's "quiet mode" were "designed to fail" because they are optional rather than default settings. "Most people will not turn the setting on," he said. "It's like you have to turn on the air bag every time you get into the car."

The trial, brought by California, Colorado, Kentucky, New Jersey and 25 other states, alleges Meta designed Facebook and Instagram to hook young users, fueling anxiety, depression and even suicide, and illegally collected data from children under 13. A ruling against Meta could expose the company to penalties that legal analysts estimate could reach roughly $200 billion and force design changes across its platforms.

Béjar is the first witness in a case that experts describe as the biggest legal test yet of social media's effects on young users. The trial is one of thousands of lawsuits against social media companies alleging their platforms are addictive and have fueled youth mental health problems. A prior case brought by New Mexico resulted in $942 million in damages and penalties and an order requiring Meta to change its platforms in that state.

On cross-examination, Meta attorney Brian Stekloff pressed Béjar on whether he had "solved" any of the safety risks he had worked on, an apparent effort to highlight the complexity of these challenges. Béjar acknowledged that the teams he worked with were full of qualified people he respected, and that none of the risk issues had been fully resolved.

"Don't ask, don't tell" on under-13 users

Béjar testified that Meta adopted what he described as a "don't ask, don't tell" approach toward users under 13, who are prohibited from the platforms under federal law. He said the company had technology to flag potentially millions of users suspected to be under age 13 but chose not to deploy it because doing so would reduce long-term revenue. The states allege Meta collected children's personal information without legally required parental consent, violating federal child data protection law.

Béjar also read jurors an email he sent to Meta's chief product officer Chris Cox, highlighting a gap between the prevalence of harmful content that Meta reported and the actual harm users reported. "Young people were experiencing harm at extraordinarily high rates," he said. "A parent would have wanted to have known."

Personal stakes and broader implications

Béjar said one reason he returned to Meta in 2019 was seeing how his teenage daughter was treated on Instagram. He said she wanted a space where women could discuss cars but instead experienced misogynistic comments, including about her breasts, at age 16. "She got a good following, at the price of harm," he said.

The trial is scheduled to last about six weeks in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Jurors are expected to issue an advisory verdict, and Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will decide whether Meta is liable and determine any civil penalties and changes to Facebook and Instagram.

Meta has denied the allegations. In his opening statement Tuesday, attorney Paul Schmidt argued that the company was sensitive to the risks to teens, sought to address them and did not deceive the public about them. The state attorneys have not yet said whether they will call Zuckerberg as a witness.

The outcome could have consequences far beyond Meta. Legal analysts say other major platforms, including TikTok, YouTube and Snapchat, would face similar litigation if the states prevail. "The domino effect will be hugely important," said Leeza Garber, a cybersecurity expert and privacy attorney.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.