Zuckerberg Pushes Back as Social Media Addiction Trial Unfolds

Mark Zuckerberg finally had his day in court and he wasn’t backing down.

Appearing in Los Angeles Superior Court in a high-profile social media addiction trial, the Meta CEO rejected claims that Facebook and Instagram are engineered to hook young users. Instead, Zuckerberg framed the success of social media as a simple result of building something people find useful.

“You should try and create something useful … and if you do, people will naturally want to use it,” Zuckerberg testified. His “north star,” he said, is delivering value and a positive experience not fostering addiction.

The lawsuit centers on accusations that social media platforms are deliberately designed to exploit psychological vulnerabilities, particularly among teens. The plaintiff, a 19-year-old woman identified in court filings as K.G.M., argues that companies like Meta knowingly built systems to maximize screen time and, by extension, advertising revenue.

Attorneys for the plaintiff claim that addiction not innovation explains why social media usage has exploded over the past decade.

Zuckerberg countered by comparing time spent on Facebook and Instagram to traditional entertainment. “TV hasn’t got better over time but social media has quite a bit,” he told the court.

The broader context is staggering. A report from Common Sense Media found that teenagers spend an average of nine hours per day on entertainment media, while children aged 8–12 spend roughly six hours daily not including schoolwork. Social media addiction has become a frequent topic in both policy debates and family living rooms.

Zuckerberg emphasized that Meta has added safeguards over time, including:

• Age verification systems and removal of accounts for users under 13.

• Parental controls and time-management tools.

• Algorithm adjustments designed to reduce harmful content exposure.

He also argued that from a business perspective, targeting teenagers is not as financially compelling as critics suggest. According to Zuckerberg, less than 1% of Instagram’s revenue comes from teens a demographic with limited purchasing power.

If the goal were simply short-term profit maximization, he implied, the focus would lie elsewhere.

Meta’s defense team argues that the social media addiction claims misunderstand how platforms operate. Engagement, they say, reflects consumer choice in a competitive digital marketplace. In the United States alone, over 240 million people use social media, with adults accounting for the overwhelming majority of ad-driven revenue.

Meta is not alone in facing scrutiny. Google remains a co-defendant in the case, while TikTok and Snapchat settled prior to trial. YouTube, owned by Google, has argued its platform functions differently and should not be lumped into the same legal category.

The courtroom itself reflected the stakes. Cameras were banned, and Judge Carolyn Kuhl even warned attendees that using AI-enabled glasses with facial recognition to record jurors would result in contempt of court.

The social media addiction trial could have far-reaching implications. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have floated proposals to regulate algorithms, limit youth access, and impose stricter transparency requirements on tech companies. The outcome of this case may shape how aggressively states pursue regulation.

At its heart, the debate raises a fundamental question: Are tech platforms responsible for how long users choose to spend online, or does responsibility ultimately lie with individuals and families?

For Zuckerberg, the answer is clear. People use Facebook and Instagram because they find value in connecting with friends, sharing content, and engaging with communities. The plaintiffs argue that engineered engagement distorts free choice.

As the social media addiction trial continues, its impact may stretch far beyond one courtroom. With billions of users worldwide and digital platforms woven into daily life, the stakes are nothing short of cultural.

If you want updates on the future of social media regulation, share this article or subscribe to our newsletter for more coverage.