New York, United States – February 12, 2026 — Instagram head Adam Mosseri testified on Wednesday that he does not believe users can become “clinically addicted” to the social media platform, delivering a key defence statement during a landmark federal trial examining Meta’s responsibility for youth mental health harms linked to Instagram and Facebook.
Mosseri, who has led Instagram since 2018, took the stand in the U.S. District Court in Oakland, California, as part of the first major bellwether trial in a sprawling multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving more than 1,400 lawsuits filed by families across the United States. The plaintiffs allege that Meta’s platforms are designed to be addictive, deliberately exploit psychological vulnerabilities in children and teenagers, and contribute to serious mental health crises, including depression, anxiety, eating disorders, self-harm, and suicide.
Under oath, Mosseri firmly rejected the characterization of Instagram as “clinically addictive.” When asked by plaintiffs’ counsel whether he believes Instagram can cause clinical addiction, Mosseri responded:
“I do not believe Instagram is clinically addictive in the way that term is understood in medical or psychological science. People can use it excessively, and some may struggle to moderate their usage, but that does not meet the clinical definition of addiction.”
He argued that while Instagram is intentionally engaging and designed to maximize time spent on the platform, the company views problematic use as a behavioural issue rather than a clinical disorder comparable to substance addiction. Mosseri emphasized that Meta has implemented numerous safety features over the years—including time limits, parental controls, teen accounts with stricter defaults, and warnings about excessive use—to help users manage their time and protect vulnerable groups.
The testimony came on the second day of Mosseri’s appearance in the trial, which is expected to last several weeks. The case is being closely watched because it is the first to reach a jury among hundreds of similar lawsuits consolidated in the MDL. A plaintiff’s victory could open the door to billions of dollars in potential damages and force sweeping changes to how Meta designs and operates its platforms for minors.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys presented internal Meta documents during the trial showing that company researchers had repeatedly warned senior executives—dating back to at least 2019—that Instagram could harm teenage girls’ mental health, exacerbate body-image issues, and increase risks of anxiety and depression. One frequently cited 2021 internal presentation stated that “thirty-two percent of teenage girls said that when they felt bad about their bodies, Instagram made them feel worse.”
Mosseri countered that the company takes such research seriously but has acted on it by introducing protective features, many of which were rolled out after 2021. He also argued that correlation does not prove causation and that many factors—including family environment, peer pressure, and broader societal pressures—contribute to youth mental health challenges.
The Instagram chief faced intense cross-examination on Meta’s business model, particularly the role of engagement-driven algorithms, infinite scroll, likes, comments, and notifications in keeping users—especially teenagers—returning repeatedly. Mosseri acknowledged that maximizing time spent is a core goal but insisted that the company balances engagement with safety and well-being.
The trial, presided over by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, is focused on eight representative cases involving teenagers who allegedly suffered severe harm from Instagram use. The plaintiffs seek to hold Meta liable under state consumer-protection and negligence laws, arguing that the company knew or should have known of the risks but prioritized profit over safety.
Meta has consistently maintained that its platforms are not responsible for mental health outcomes and that scientific evidence does not support claims of clinical addiction or direct causation of harm. The company has also pointed to its safety tools and cooperation with mental health experts as evidence of responsible stewardship.
The outcome of this bellwether trial is expected to heavily influence the resolution of hundreds of other pending cases. A jury verdict in favour of the plaintiffs could dramatically reshape social media regulation, platform liability, and product design standards worldwide.
As Mosseri’s testimony continues in the coming days, legal analysts anticipate further scrutiny of Meta’s internal decision-making, research findings, and executive-level responses to mounting evidence of potential harm to young users.
