Social media giant Meta has agreed to pay an $18bn settlement with US states and territories over legal claims that its Facebook and Instagram platforms are harming children, but the firm continues to deny any wrongdoing.
The landmark settlement – approved by California judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 26 August – marks the company’s largest payment over child safety litigation to date, and will be distributed to 48 US states and three territories in annual instalments over a 10-year period.
Initially filed by 29 states in 2023, the lawsuit accused Meta of numerous violations of federal and state child privacy laws, including breaches of the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act – intended to protect children under 13 years old from being targeted by businesses operating online.
The states specifically alleged that Meta designed its Facebook and Instagram platforms to be addictive to children and teens, with features on the apps (such as video autoplay and Instagram Stories) made to keep them on there for as long as possible, and other functions (such as frequent push notifications) intended to draw them back in.
The states further alleged that the company misled consumers about the safety of the platforms for younger users, and also accused it of improperly collecting and using children’s personal data.
Meta has consistently denied any wrongdoing, and continues to do so despite the settlement agreement, which also requires Meta to introduce a host of changes to better protect young users of its platforms.
This includes setting default daily time limits that prevent young users from using Facebook or Instagram for more than two hours a day, night-time blocks on all usage from midnight until 6am, and disabling push notifications during school hours.
Other changes
Other changes Meta will need to make include allowing users to choose feeds that are not algorithmically-driven, giving them the ability to turn off autoplay for videos and content, and completely removing access to extreme make-up filters.
Judge Rogers said the settlement deal “reflects a fair, reasonable, comprehensive and good faith approach not only to provide monetary relief, but importantly, to change conduct in a way that attempts to meaningfully address the negative impacts of the social media platforms at issue”.
California attorney general Rob Bonta said: “This is a major moment to clean up an industry that has been hurting our kids,” further noting that “the trial did not go well for Meta”.
He added that now the Meta case has been settled, his office will begin looking at the rest of the industry: “There is a bigger ecosystem here,” said Bonta. “So, we’ll be focused on TikTok, we’ll focus on Snap, and I’m very concerned about YouTube.”
However, Meta has said that 30% of the $18bn settlement will only be released if YouTube and TikTok – competitors owned by Google and TikTok USDS Joint Venture LLC, respectively – also agree to implement a one-hour daily limit, night mode, and age assurance measures, and each pay an amount matching the 30% figure.
“The agreement is designed to drive industry-wide adoption, ensuring teens receive consistent protections across the apps they use most, like YouTube and TikTok,” said Meta.
YouTube and TikTok are yet to comment on Meta’s demands for changes to their platforms, but this aspect of the deal is yet to be greenlit by Judge Rogers.
Bonta, however, urged the other platforms to implement new restrictions for young users, saying the settlement with Meta “is a good blueprint” for other companies to follow.
Meta executive-turned-whistleblower Kelly Stonelake said the settlement is evidence the company was aware certain policies needed to be altered, adding that it is concerning that a lawsuit was needed to press the firm into making safety-related changes to its platforms.
“Meta spent years insisting that the people raising these concerns were wrong, that its products were safe, and that it could be trusted to police itself,” she wrote in a blog post.
“Today, it agreed to change those products and declared that the rest of the industry should do the same,” added Stonelake.
“If Meta believes these measures are necessary enough to become an industry standard, then the obvious question is why children had to wait until attorneys general took the company to federal court to get them.”
Meta, however, maintains that the settlement agreement is “building on our longstanding efforts to empower parents and support teens”.
Welcome changes
Responding to the settlement agreement, Mark Rowland, chief executive of the UK-based Mental Health Foundation, said: “We are pleased to see Meta making these changes in America, and now they must be implemented worldwide. There is a significant and growing body of evidence showing how social media can harm people’s mental health.
“Changes like introducing daily usage limits are the exact sort of improvements social media platforms need to introduce to reduce the risk of addictive behaviours developing among users.”
He added that other social media platforms that target young people, including TikTok and X, should also introduce these measures to protect users’ mental health.
Mark Jones, a criminal partner and online safety expert from UK law firm Payne Hicks Beach, also highlighted the need for similar changes to be made in Meta’s UK market.
“This is surely the first of many such cases against tech companies in the US, but what about the UK?” he said. “In the US, several states joined forces to take on Meta. In the UK, families and individuals have compelling evidence that their children suffered serious harm, sometimes with fatal consequences, yet we do not see the same type of large civil claims here.
“Ofcom can investigate and issue fines to the platforms, but that is not the same as securing justice or compensation for those families. The recent cases in the US against tech companies for online harms appear to signal that it is civil claims that affect change more than regulation.”
