Meta is under pressure once again after newly unsealed court filings revealed that the company ended an internal research project that found Facebook use could negatively affect users’ mental health. The claims appear in a wide-ranging lawsuit brought by school districts across the United States, which accuses Meta and other social media giants of concealing known risks to children and teens.
The documents detail a 2020 initiative known as Project Mercury, a study Meta conducted with the help of Nielsen to examine how taking a break from Facebook affected emotional well-being. The project focused on whether deactivating the platform for one week would influence feelings of anxiety, depression, loneliness, and self-comparison.
Study Results Indicated Improvement When Users Logged Off
According to the filings, the study produced results that were troubling for Meta. Individuals who stepped away from Facebook for a short period said they felt less anxious, less depressed, and less prone to comparing themselves with others. These findings suggested that even a temporary break from the platform could improve mental wellness.
However, instead of releasing the study or expanding the research, the company is alleged to have stopped the project entirely. Meta executives reportedly argued internally that the results were influenced by ongoing negative media coverage about the platform, undermining the reliability of the findings.
Internal communications cited in the lawsuit indicate that not all employees agreed with that explanation. One researcher reportedly emphasized that the study did show a causal link between Facebook use and harmful social comparison. Another staff member expressed concern that keeping such findings quiet could resemble situations in other industries where damaging evidence was withheld from the public.
Public Messaging Said to Conflict With Internal Knowledge
The lawsuit claims that despite the internal awareness of potential harm, Meta later told federal lawmakers that the company was unable to quantify any negative effects of its platforms on teenage girls. The plaintiffs argue that this contradicted Meta’s own research and misled regulators and parents who were concerned about young people’s online experiences.
In a statement responding to the allegations, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said the company ended the study because of methodological problems and emphasized that Meta has devoted years to improving the safety of its products. He said Meta has taken feedback from parents seriously and has consistently worked to strengthen protections for younger users.
Lawsuit Targets Broader Industry Practices
The accusations against Meta are part of a larger complaint filed by law firm Motley Rice, which represents school districts suing Meta, Google, TikTok, and Snapchat. The plaintiffs allege that these companies knowingly hid risks associated with their services while designing features that made their platforms increasingly appealing to children and teens.
Among the broad claims in the lawsuit, the plaintiffs say the platforms:
- Allowed or tolerated the presence of users under the age of 13, despite age restrictions.
- Failed to adequately address the presence of child sexual abuse material.
- Encouraged students to increase their platform use even while in school.
- Attempted to influence child-focused organizations to publicly support claims that their platforms were safe for younger audiences.
An example highlighted in the complaint involves TikTok’s sponsorship of the National PTA. According to the filings, internal TikTok discussions indicated the organization would be more willing to publicly advocate for the platform after receiving funding, a claim the lawsuit points to as evidence of attempted influence.
Meta Faces the Most Detailed Accusations
While multiple companies are named in the lawsuit, the bulk of the detailed allegations center on Meta. Internal documents cited by the plaintiffs suggest that the company:
- Developed youth safety tools that were ineffective or rarely used.
- Blocked trials of certain protective measures over fears they could reduce engagement or slow growth.
- Allowed a high threshold—allegedly up to 17 violations—before removing accounts linked to human trafficking activity.
- Continued optimizing the platform in ways that increased harmful content exposure for teens, despite internal awareness of the risk.
- Delayed key initiatives meant to protect minors from predatory behavior due to concerns about growth metrics.
- Pressured safety teams to support decisions that prioritized engagement over stronger safeguards.
The filing also refers to internal discussions from 2021 involving CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in which he reportedly indicated that child safety efforts were not his top priority at the time, citing a greater focus on long-term product development such as the metaverse. The plaintiffs say that repeated calls for increased child-safety resources from senior executives, including former global policy chief Nick Clegg, were either downplayed or disregarded.
Meta Pushes Back on Characterization of Its Safety Efforts
Stone disputed many of the lawsuit’s most serious claims, saying that they rely on selective interpretations of documents and overlook the company’s broader safety work. He said Meta’s current policies mandate immediate removal of accounts flagged for human trafficking-related violations and added that the company has invested heavily in tools and features designed to help parents and teens manage online risks.
Meta also argued that the plaintiffs are presenting an incomplete view of its efforts by citing isolated comments and internal messages without broader context.
