Instagram chief executive Adam Mosseri has denied that social media platforms are clinically addictive, delivering key testimony in a closely watched U.S. trial that could redefine the legal responsibilities of tech companies toward young users. The Instagram CEO Trial has drawn national attention as regulators and families question the impact of social media on youth mental health.
Appearing before a Los Angeles Superior Court jury, Mosseri rejected allegations that Instagram was intentionally engineered to create addiction among teenagers. Under questioning, he acknowledged that some users may develop “problematic use” habits but argued that this should not be equated with medically recognized addiction. He emphasized that addiction is a clinical diagnosis requiring specific medical criteria and said casual references to being “addicted” to social media are often colloquial rather than scientific.
The testimony came as part of a civil lawsuit brought by a young woman who alleges that prolonged use of Instagram during her adolescence contributed to serious mental health challenges. Plaintiffs argue that Instagram’s design, including infinite scrolling, algorithmic recommendations, and engagement-driven notifications was deliberately crafted to maximize user retention, particularly among teens.
During the Instagram CEO Trial, Mosseri also addressed the company’s business model, stating that teenagers do not represent Instagram’s most profitable demographic. He suggested that claims the platform prioritized youth engagement at the expense of safety are inconsistent with the company’s revenue structure.
Plaintiffs Allege Deliberate Design to Capture Young Minds
At the heart of the case is the allegation that Instagram, along with other major platforms, exploited behavioral psychology to keep young users engaged for extended periods. Attorneys representing the plaintiff argue that the platform’s architecture mirrors mechanisms commonly associated with addictive behaviors, comparing algorithm-driven content feeds to systems designed to deliver variable rewards.
The plaintiff, now 20, claims her mental health deteriorated after years of heavy social media use beginning in childhood. Her legal team contends that Instagram’s features amplified insecurities, contributed to anxiety and depression, and encouraged compulsive usage patterns.
Lawyers emphasized in the Instagram CEO Trial that internal communications and product development strategies will demonstrate awareness within tech companies of the potential psychological impact on adolescents. They argue that design elements such as endless content refresh and personalized recommendation systems were not accidental innovations but intentional tools to drive prolonged engagement.
Meta’s defense team, however, disputes the notion that platform design alone caused harm. They argue that mental health outcomes are complex and influenced by multiple factors, including family circumstances, offline experiences, and broader societal pressures. The defense also pointed to safety measures introduced in recent years, including parental controls, screen time management tools, and content moderation policies aimed at protecting young users.
A Case With Far-Reaching Implications
Legal observers describe the case as potentially transformative for the tech industry. If the court determines that social media platforms can be held liable for alleged psychological harm stemming from product design, it could open the door to similar lawsuits nationwide.
The trial also revisits a broader debate over whether social media use constitutes addiction in a clinical sense. While many researchers acknowledge problematic usage patterns, the classification of social media addiction remains contested within medical and psychological communities.
As proceedings continue, additional executives and expert witnesses are expected to testify. The Instagram CEO Trial could influence not only corporate accountability but also regulatory approaches to digital platforms.
Beyond the courtroom, the case reflects growing public scrutiny of how technology shapes youth behavior and mental health. For Meta and the wider social media industry, the outcome could signal a new era of legal and ethical expectations, one that balances innovation and profit against the well-being of younger generations.
