The lawsuit, filed in 2024 by Attorney General Andrea Campbell, alleges that Meta did this to make a profit and that its actions affected hundreds of thousands of teenagers in Massachusetts who use the social media platforms.
“We are making claims based only on the tools that Meta has developed because its own research shows they encourage addiction to the platform in a variety of ways,” said State Solicitor David Kravitz, adding that the state’s claim has nothing to do the company’s algorithms or failure to moderate content.
Meta said Friday that it strongly disagrees with the allegations and is “confident the evidence will show our long-standing commitment to supporting young people.” Its attorney, Mark Mosier, argued in court that the lawsuit “would impose liabilities for performing traditional publishing functions” and that its actions are protected by the First Amendment.
“The Commonwealth would have a better chance of getting around the First Amendment if they alleged that the speech was false or fraudulent,” Mosier said. “But when they acknowledge that it’s truthful, that brings it in the heart of the First Amendment.”
Several of the judges, though, seem to be more concerned about Meta’s functions, such as notifications, than the content on its platforms.
“I didn’t understand the claims to be that Meta is relaying false information vis-a-vis the notifications, but that it has created an algorithm of incessant notifications … designed so as to feed into the fear of missing out—FOMO—that teenagers generally have,” Justice Dalila Wendlandt said. “That is the basis of the claim.”
