LOS ANGELES — Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg told jurors Wednesday that children under 13 are barred from Instagram, rejecting accusations that Meta built or marketed the app to hook kids in a landmark youth addiction trial. The Zuckerberg testimony came as plaintiffs displayed internal presentations and emails — including one that urged executives to “bring them in as tweens” — to argue the company tracked underage users while publicly insisting kids were not allowed, Feb. 18, 2026.
The case was brought by a California woman, identified in court filings as K.G.M., who says she began using YouTube and Instagram in elementary school and later struggled with depression and suicidal thoughts that she blames in part on compulsive social media use. Meta and Google, which owns YouTube, deny the claims and argue that her mental health problems stem from other factors and that the platforms offer safety tools and parental controls.
Zuckerberg testimony is unfolding in a Los Angeles County Superior Court proceeding that lawyers on both sides have described as a bellwether for thousands of similar lawsuits alleging social media products are defective by design. TikTok and Snap were originally defendants but settled with the plaintiff before trial, according to Reuters’ reporting on opening statements.
Zuckerberg testimony puts a ‘tween’ strategy under the microscope
On the stand, Zuckerberg repeatedly returned to a simple point: Meta’s rules do not allow kids under 13 to have Instagram accounts. When pressed about enforcement, he said there are “a meaningful number of people who lie about their age to use our services,” calling age policing “very difficult,” as described by CBS News.
Lanier confronted Zuckerberg with a 2018 internal Instagram presentation that read, “If we want to win big with teens, we must bring them in as tweens.” Zuckerberg said Lanier was “mischaracterising what I am saying” and testified that Meta has, at times, discussed safer, age-appropriate versions of products — including an idea for a kid-focused Instagram — but never launched one, according to Reuters.
Another internal email shown to jurors captured a different problem: how to prove who is actually 13. In it, Nick Clegg, then Meta’s vice president of global affairs, warned top executives that Meta had age limits that were “unenforced (unenforceable?),” Reuters reported. Zuckerberg responded that verifying a user’s age is hard for app makers and argued responsibility should shift to device makers, such as Apple and Google, which control operating systems and app stores.
The plaintiff’s lawyer also pointed jurors to internal estimates about underage use. The judge and jury were shown a 2018 document suggesting Instagram believed millions of users were under 13 at the time, as well as internal discussions about “going after under 13-year-olds,” according to the Los Angeles Times.
Zuckerberg testimony and the fight over “time spent”
Zuckerberg testimony also veered into an issue central to the plaintiff’s theory: whether Meta set out to maximize engagement even when it could intensify compulsive use. Lanier questioned Zuckerberg about his past statements to Congress and displayed older emails describing aims to increase time spent on Instagram by double-digit percentage points. Zuckerberg said the company used to set goals related to time spent but has since changed its approach, according to Reuters.
In the courtroom, Zuckerberg tried to draw a distinction between an internal metric and a marching order. “It’s different than us trying to just increase time,” he said, describing time spent as one way to compare Instagram’s performance with rivals, CBS News reported.
He was also asked about product choices that critics say can amplify appearance-related pressure among teens, including beauty filters. Zuckerberg said Meta decided to allow such filters in the name of free expression, but that the company should not build or recommend them, CBS News reported.
What’s at stake in the landmark youth addiction trial
The Zuckerberg testimony is being closely watched because the case is framed as a product-design dispute, not a fight over specific user posts. At the start of trial, the judge instructed jurors that the companies cannot be held liable for recommending content created by others, but they can be judged on the design and operation of their platforms, Reuters reported.
A verdict against Meta and YouTube could help other plaintiffs argue that common features — such as infinite scroll, recommendation algorithms and notification systems — were engineered to exploit vulnerabilities in young users. A defense win, meanwhile, could reinforce tech companies’ ability to beat back design-based claims even as regulators and lawmakers push for tougher child-safety rules.
Years of warnings and lawsuits led to Zuckerberg testimony
While the Zuckerberg testimony is a first for this jury, the allegations echo years of debate over Meta’s research and youth strategy. In 2021, lawmakers cited leaked internal materials that suggested Meta knew Instagram could worsen teens’ mental health, according to a Reuters report from September 2021.
That same year, Instagram paused plans for an under-13 version of the app after an outcry tied to the “Facebook Files” disclosures and broader concerns about child safety, as reported by Al Jazeera.
By 2023, a coalition of states sued Meta, arguing features on Instagram and Facebook were addictive and harmed children’s mental health, according to The Associated Press. In 2024, a federal judge ruled Meta must face key claims in those state lawsuits, Reuters reported.
The Zuckerberg testimony is expected to continue as Meta’s lawyers complete their questioning and the trial moves deeper into expert testimony and the plaintiff’s account of her social media use. The proceedings are expected to run for weeks, with both sides signaling the case could shape how courts and juries evaluate whether popular online platforms can be treated like harmful consumer products.
