Instagram chief Adam Mosseri told a federal court that only a small fraction of teenagers were using the platform’s “Take a Break” safety feature before Instagram switched it on by default, as Meta faces sweeping allegations that its social media services were designed to keep children hooked.
Testifying in Oakland, California, Mosseri pushed back against claims that Instagram deliberately delayed making the feature automatic. The tool, introduced in 2021, prompts users to step away from the platform after spending a set amount of time on it.
Under questioning about the feature’s adoption, Mosseri acknowledged that teenage usage remained in the low single digits before the default setting was introduced in September 2024.
He also recalled that early testing had produced a much stronger response among teenagers who voluntarily enabled the feature. More than 90% of those users continued keeping it switched on, according to an estimate Mosseri had previously discussed.
“Most teens didn’t want it,” Mosseri said, while maintaining that Instagram nevertheless decided to move ahead with the feature.
The testimony came during a major case brought by 29 U.S. states against Meta. The states allege that the company violated federal law in its handling of data belonging to children under 13 and accuse Instagram and Facebook of using design choices that encouraged excessive use among young people.
Four states — California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey — have separately focused on allegations that Meta’s platforms were built to draw young users in, contributing to serious mental-health concerns. The states have indicated that the financial consequences for Meta could approach $200 billion.
Meta has denied intentionally designing its services to addict children. The company has also argued that its research does not establish a clear connection between adolescent social-media use and declining well-being.
Mosseri Rejects Claims of Withholding Safety Information
Mosseri also faced questions about how information concerning teenagers’ safety was handled inside Instagram.
He denied knowing of any policy aimed at removing unfavorable findings from internal presentations or limiting the information reaching him. According to Mosseri, he expected safety-related material presented to leadership to be reliable and supported by appropriate expertise.
He said he wanted his teams to provide a full picture of how Instagram was affecting young users rather than withholding information.
The company also changed the way sensitive research concerning teenagers was handled after the 2021 disclosure of internal Meta documents. Mosseri said access to some of that research was subsequently concentrated within a dedicated team.
Presentation on Teen Safety Comes Under Scrutiny
Earlier in the proceedings, Instagram product design director Francesco Fogu testified about a 2023 presentation prepared for senior leadership.
Fogu acknowledged that information was removed from one slide showing teenage users encountered certain categories of harmful content — including bullying, suicide-related material, hate, nudity and violence — at a rate reportedly 1.5 times higher than adults.
During questioning by Meta’s side, Fogu said the same figure appeared elsewhere in the presentation.
He also acknowledged that Instagram understood the “Take a Break” feature would reach fewer users if teenagers were required to activate it themselves rather than having it enabled automatically.
The trial is expected to continue for several weeks. Jurors are expected to provide an advisory verdict, while the final decisions on Meta’s liability, potential penalties and possible changes to Facebook and Instagram will rest with the federal judge.
Mosseri has previously appeared as a witness in litigation involving allegations over Instagram’s impact on young users. In a separate case in Los Angeles, a jury found Meta and Google negligent in the design of their platforms and awarded $6 million to a young woman who said she became addicted to Instagram and YouTube during childhood.
Meta has also faced mounting scrutiny from state authorities. A New Mexico judge recently ordered the company to pay $567 million following allegations concerning the impact of its platforms on teenagers’ mental health. Tennessee is pursuing a separate case involving similar accusations.
