Adam Mosseri, the head of Meta’s Instagram, told a Los Angeles court on Wednesday that he disagrees with the notion that people can be clinically addicted to social media. His testimony came during a landmark trial brought by plaintiffs who argue that social media harms children and that their case could shape how similar lawsuits proceed. Mosseri also described a different framing he said his company uses when discussing harmful patterns of use, emphasizing distinctions between clinical addiction and what he referred to as problematic use.
Mosseri’s appearance in court focused attention on a central dispute in the case: whether “addiction” is the correct medical lens for what plaintiffs say children experience on social platforms. The lawsuit, according to the testimony, is structured around bellwether trials, with a plaintiff identified only by the initials “KGM” selected alongside two other plaintiffs to test the arguments that will later be evaluated by juries in similar claims. Meta Platforms and Google’s YouTube remain as defendants after TikTok and Snap settled, leaving the Los Angeles proceedings to proceed with the two remaining companies.
Mosseri said it was important to differentiate clinical addiction from what he called problematic use. He testified that his company uses the term “problematic use” to refer to someone spending more time on Instagram than they feel good about, and he said that “definitely happens.” When pressed about his qualifications to speak on social media addiction, he told the court he was not claiming to be a medical expert. He said that someone “very close” to him has experienced serious clinical addiction, which he said led him to be “being careful with my words.”
The exchange also turned to whether Mosseri previously used the word “addiction.” The plaintiff’s lawyer presented quotes attributed to Mosseri from a podcast interview in which he used the term addiction in relation to social media use. Mosseri, as described in the courtroom proceedings, clarified that he was probably using the term “too casually,” reflecting how people often use the word in everyday speech.
As the questioning moved to platform design choices, Mosseri and the plaintiff’s lawyer, Mark Lanier, engaged in a back-and-forth involving Instagram’s cosmetic filters and the way those filters can change people’s appearance. Mosseri told the court that “We are trying to be as safe as possible but also censor as little as possible.” During the same line of testimony, parents whose children had struggled with social media issues were described as visibly upset as the discussion addressed body dysmorphia and cosmetic filters.
The courtroom’s sensitivity showed up again when the judge made an announcement to members of the public after displays of emotion, reminding them it was “improper to indicate some position.” Meta shut down all third-party augmented reality filters in January 2025, and the trial record addressed that decision as testimony continued on how filters may affect users’ perceptions.
During cross-examination, Mosseri and Meta lawyer Phyllis Jones tried to reframe the plaintiff’s point that Lanier suggested during his questioning—that the company is looking to profit off teens. Mosseri told the court that Instagram makes “less money from teens than from any other demographic on the app,” adding that teens do not tend to click on ads and often do not have disposable income to spend on products advertised to them. Lanier also pressed Mosseri during a second opportunity to question him, pointing to research he said shows people who join social media platforms at a young age are more likely to stay on them longer, which he said can make teen users prime for meaningful long-term profit.
Mosseri responded by saying, “Often people try to frame things as you either prioritize safety or you prioritize revenue,” and he added, “It’s really hard to imagine any instance where prioritizing safety isn’t good for revenue.” The courtroom testimony thus underscored an argument over how safety decisions intersect with revenue incentives in the design and operation of Instagram.
The next witness expected in the Los Angeles case is Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who is scheduled to take the stand next week. Separately, the matter is not limited to California: the cluster’s report also notes that Meta is facing another trial in New Mexico that began this week.