Did Zuckerberg LIE Under Oath?!

Internal Meta documents presented in a Los Angeles courtroom directly contradict Mark Zuckerberg’s sworn testimony that Instagram never intentionally targeted children under 13, exposing what may be the most damaging corporate liability case since Big Tobacco.

Story Snapshot

Zuckerberg testified under oath that Instagram prohibits users under 13, yet internal 2018 documents reveal that Meta knew approximately 4 million underage users were active on the platform
Leaked internal communications from 2017 show Instagram employees complained about Zuckerberg’s directive to “go after under 13-year-olds” despite public age restrictions
Meta’s own “Project Myst” research confirmed that traumatized children are especially vulnerable to platform addiction and parental controls prove ineffective
Over 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta for deliberately engineering addictive features that harm minors and fuel the youth mental health crisis
This landmark trial is the first of its kind to reach verdict, with hundreds of similar lawsuits pending nationwide and potential to reshape the entire social media industry

Zuckerberg’s Testimony Contradicted by Company’s Own Records

Mark Zuckerberg appeared in a Los Angeles courtroom on February 18, 2026, claiming Instagram has never permitted children under 13 to use the platform. His testimony came in a landmark civil trial where families accuse Meta of deliberately designing Instagram to addict young users and cause severe mental health damage. However, internal Meta documents introduced during the hearing directly contradict his claims.

A 2018 internal analysis revealed Instagram believed approximately 4 million users were under 13, representing roughly 30 percent of all 10-to-12-year-olds in the United States at that time. Zuckerberg acknowledged that enforcement remains “very difficult” because “a meaningful number of people” lie about their age.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg faced questioning in a Los Angeles courtroom on Wednesday about Instagram's under-13 users and Meta's efforts to boost engagement, as a trial examines whether the company knowingly offered an addictive and harmful product to children and teens.…

— CBS News (@CBSNews) February 18, 2026

Internal Communications Expose Deliberate Strategy to Target Minors

The most damaging evidence presented during the trial came from Meta’s own internal communications spanning 2013 to 2017. These documents detailed systematic efforts to specifically target teenagers and increase “time spent” on the app by children under 13. A particularly revealing 2017 message exchange captured Instagram employees complaining about Zuckerberg’s explicit push to “go after under 13-year-olds.”

This evidence directly undermines Meta’s public position that the company never intended to attract underage users. The plaintiff’s legal team drew parallels to Big Tobacco litigation, citing internal employee warnings that ignoring research on platform harms would be “akin to big tobacco knowing cigarettes were bad while continuing to promote their safety.”

Meta’s Own Research Confirmed Vulnerability of Traumatized Children

Internal Meta research identified as “Project Myst” provided further evidence against the company’s defense. This study found that children experiencing trauma and stress are particularly vulnerable to platform addiction, and that parental controls have minimal impact on preventing harmful usage patterns.

Meta’s legal team has pursued a dual strategy of discrediting the concept of social media addiction entirely while simultaneously emphasizing the plaintiff’s pre-existing mental health challenges, including emotional abuse, body image issues, and bullying.

The plaintiff, now 20 years old, claims she became addicted to Instagram at age 9 and suffered severe emotional damage as a result. Meta argues these pre-existing factors, not platform design, caused her struggles.

Unprecedented Legal Battle Could Reshape Big Tech Accountability

This trial represents the first case of its kind to proceed to verdict, with hundreds of similar lawsuits pending across the United States. Two other defendants, TikTok and Snap, have already settled out of court rather than face trial. More than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits claiming Meta deliberately designed addictive features on Instagram and Facebook to harm young people and contribute to the youth mental health crisis.

The case builds on revelations from former Facebook employee Frances Haugen, who released thousands of internal documents in October 2021 showing Meta’s awareness of harmful effects on teen mental health while prioritizing profits over safety. A verdict holding Meta liable could force industry-wide changes to addictive features like endless scrolling and engagement-driven algorithms.

Constitutional Concerns and Corporate Overreach

This case highlights fundamental concerns about corporate accountability and the protection of America’s children from predatory business practices that prioritize profits over wellbeing. The evidence suggests Meta knowingly exploited psychological vulnerabilities in minors while publicly claiming to protect them.

Such corporate overreach demands accountability, especially when internal research confirms the company understood the harms being inflicted on the most vulnerable users. The federal judge has ruled Zuckerberg cannot face personal liability, protecting his estimated $220 billion fortune, but Meta itself faces significant financial and regulatory consequences.

Parents from the United States and United Kingdom have gathered outside the courthouse, viewing this as a global crisis requiring immediate action to protect children from manipulative platform design.