Instagram Head Adam Mosseri Testifies in Meta Youth Addiction Trial

Instagram head Adam Mosseri testified in an Oakland, California federal court on Tuesday, August 25, 2026, defending parent company Meta against a landmark lawsuit filed by a bipartisan coalition of state attorneys general.

Prosecutors from California, Colorado, Kentucky, and New Jersey claim Meta engineered platforms like Instagram and Facebook to hook young users and hide health risks, exposing the company to potential financial penalties reaching $1.4 trillion.

Under questioning regarding internal metrics for time-management safety features like "Take a Break," Mosseri addressed evidence showing that early uptake among teenagers dropped to as low as 1.8 percent before the feature became an account default.

The pop-up notifications "helped, but not nearly as much as we hoped," said Adam Mosseri, Head of Instagram.

State prosecutors highlighted a previous blog post where Mosseri cited a high retention rate for the feature without disclosing that initial engagement remained extremely low among younger demographics, arguing parents were left uninformed.

"Correct," said Mosseri, confirming there was no way for parents at the time to know that only 1 to 2 percent of teens used the feature.

Continuing his testimony, Mosseri noted that the company never publicly disclosed those specific usage numbers before the trial, while emphasizing that single features are part of a broader suite of safety tools.

"Correct," said Mosseri, confirming Meta had not previously released the figure.

State attorneys also produced internal employee communications discussing product presentations, alleging designers were advised by Meta lawyers to restrict data shown to Mosseri to minimize legal risk. Mosseri testified he was unaware of the exchange but agreed product designers held superior technical expertise regarding data presentation.

"Yes, I think a lawyer would be a less qualified designer than a product designer," said Mosseri.

Defending the social network's safety practices, Mosseri argued that selective excerpts from internal corporate documents mischaracterize the company's holistic efforts to protect adolescent users on the platform.

"I think parents want to have good information about services, risks, etc. That's different than reporters or lawyers taking small bits from much larger documents and focusing on them in things like articles and trials," said Mosseri.

"In general, there are no silver bullets to problems like this. We have to do many things that add up," said Mosseri.

Meta representatives previously rejected the broader legal claims in statement communications, maintaining that allegations regarding deceptive design practices and user harm remain unsupported by concrete proof.

"The State AGs may call this a landmark case, but their limited claims are unsubstantiated and their financial demands are vastly disproportionate," said a Meta spokesperson.

"Rather than sticking to the facts or the law, the states have instead decided to chase an outlandish payout," said the Meta spokesperson.

The federal proceedings follow a separate Los Angeles County trial earlier this year involving a young plaintiff, where Mosseri offered earlier testimony regarding platform usage concepts and safety tradeoffs.

During that prior trial, Mosseri stated he disagreed with the term "addiction" as used in the lawsuit and said "clinical addiction" is different from "problematic use" of Instagram, which he described as users spending "too much time" on the platform.

He also noted that balancing user experience requires managing competing product priorities across the platform's global user base.

Mosseri testified that there is a tradeoff between "safety and speech" and pointed to users who dislike when Instagram features are removed or changed.

Mosseri is scheduled to continue his testimony on Wednesday as the trial proceeds in federal court.