Invest1 distinct publisher3 min readUpdated
A former engineering director testified that Instagram ran a "don't ask, don't tell" approach to under-13 users and graded staff on engagement. Twenty-five more state trials follow.
The Investor · Invest desk

Compiled by The InvestorSomething wrong?How this is made
Arturo Bejar, a former Meta engineering director, told jurors in federal court in Oakland on Wednesday that the attitude at Instagram toward users under 13 was "don't ask, don't tell" [1]. That single line matters beyond one courtroom because the four states now in trial were among 29 that sued Meta in 2023, and the other 25 are scheduled to go to trial later [5], while the lead plaintiffs say the remedy they primarily want is an injunction rather than money [14].
The case pits Meta against California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey, began Tuesday, and is expected to run about six weeks [4]. Meta also faces suits in state courts, including one under way in Tennessee [6]. The complaint alleges Meta knowingly designed features that addict children and concealed the harms, and separately that it collects data on children under 13 without parental consent in violation of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act [7]. Meta's position is that account holders must be at least 13, consistent with COPPA [8], and the company has rejected the claims and says the evidence will show its commitment to safety [9].
The load-bearing testimony is not the slogan. Bejar said performance reviews and compensation for employees working on user-facing products were mostly keyed to user numbers and time spent, and that "in that context, safety was an afterthought" [12]. He also said Meta consistently prioritized profit over safety in product design, focusing on frequency and duration of use even where that hurt wellbeing, adding: "If you step away from the product, they are not going to make any money" [2][3]. A pay-and-promotion argument is harder for a defendant to wave off than a leaked deck, because it describes a system rather than an incident, and it points at the exact levers a court could order changed.
The rest of the day filled in the mechanism. Bejar identified video autoplay and the counters that display likes, views, comments and follower totals as features built for adults and, in his words, "inherently unsafe for teenagers" [15]; child development experts have noted that teenagers are more susceptible to social comparison than adults, which makes popularity-rewarding products more harmful to them [16]. On age, he testified he found "tens of thousands" of under-13 users on Instagram in his own research and that their presence was "common knowledge" internally [17]. He began to describe Meta's detection infrastructure as among the most sophisticated in the world; the source transcript cuts off mid-sentence there [18].
Bejar's standing is the reason this is repeatable: he was at Facebook from 2009 to 2015 and returned as a safety contractor from 2019 to 2021 [10], roughly eight years inside [19], and he told Congress in 2023 that executives including Mark Zuckerberg knew of harms and chose not to make meaningful changes [11].
Watch the remedy, not the headline number. The states are seeking user-experience changes to Facebook and Instagram plus damages that could reach billions, with the amount set by the court if Meta loses [13]. An injunction that reaches autoplay, counters and age gating would set the template the other 25 states inherit [5][14][15], and the current four represent only about 14 percent of the plaintiff group [20]. Anyone building teen-facing product should assume the discoverable artifact is the compensation plan.
Follow any of these and your For You feed starts watching them — no settings page required.
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
The source text ends mid-quotation with Bejar saying "Meta has one of the most sophisticated infrastructures in the world to detect fake"; the remainder of the sentence is not present in the supplied material.
The trial began Tuesday in federal court in Oakland, California, pits Meta against the states of California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey, and is expected to last about six weeks.
The four states were among 29 that sued Meta in 2023 over child safety and privacy; the other 25 will go to trial later.
Meta also faces lawsuits in state courts, including one under way in Tennessee.
The lawsuit accuses Meta of contributing to the youth mental health crisis by knowingly and deliberately designing features that addict children and hiding those harms from the public, and argues Meta routinely collects data on children under 13 without parental consent in violation of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act.
Meta says users must be at least 13 years old to create an account, in line with COPPA.
Evidence-backed comparisons of source perspectives and observed adoption signals. Read the methodology
Which Builder, Operator, and Investor concerns the observed source mix emphasized—not a truth score.
Evidence, demonstrated adoption, hype gap, incentives, and confidence are assessed independently, each on its own current evidence. How these are measured.
Single wire account of one witness, pre-cross
Everything in the cluster comes from one publisher's report of one plaintiffs' witness on his second day of direct testimony. The quotes are specific and attributed, and Meta's denial and counsel's opening are carried, which raises reliability of the reporting itself. But the substantive assertions, engagement-weighted reviews and pay, tens of thousands of under-13 accounts, absent age-check metrics, rest on recollection with no exhibits, company data, expert testimony or cross-examination in the supplied material. Procedural facts about venue, parties, duration and remedy posture are firm; the causal and internal-incentive claims are not yet corroborated.
Legal theory widely adopted; product-side data thin
Read as uptake of the design-liability and COPPA enforcement theory, adoption is substantial and institutional: 29 states sued in 2023, four are now in a six-week federal trial in Oakland, 25 more trials are queued, and parallel state-court litigation is under way including Tennessee. That is broad, funded, multi-jurisdiction commitment rather than a single test case. What holds the score below high is the absence of any adjudicated outcome to date and the thinness of product-side measurement: the only usage-shaped datapoints are testimonial, with no company telemetry, age-assurance metrics or remedial deployment disclosed in the supplied material.
Framing hardens one witness's account into finding
The reporting itself is restrained: contested statements are attributed to the witness, Meta's denial appears, and counsel's opening is quoted at length. The overstatement sits in the framing layer, where testimony that pay and reviews keyed on engagement is presented as the pay structure being put on the stand and as pay tied to keeping kids online, a step from allegation toward established fact. With no compensation documents, no cross-examination and a single source, the gap is modest but real. It is not larger because the underlying litigation scale, remedy posture and quotes are accurately reported and easily checked.
Adversarial stakes on every named actor
Every party visible in the cluster has a declared stake in how the account lands. Meta faces injunctive changes to Facebook and Instagram plus potential penalties described as possibly billions, and its counsel's statements are advocacy in an active trial. The plaintiff states, with the California attorney general issuing a written statement, are pursuing a consumer protection theory they have already committed to in 29 filings. The witness is a paid-contractor-turned-plaintiffs' witness whose 2023 congressional testimony established a public position he is now defending on the stand. Publisher incentive is comparatively low: this is wire trial coverage republished by a business outlet, with no disclosed relationship to the parties, which is why the score is high but not extreme.
Firm on procedure, provisional on substance
Confidence is limited by cluster structure more than by reporting quality: one publisher, one source item, one witness, mid-trial. Procedural elements, the Oakland venue, four states, six-week estimate, 29-state origin, remaining 25 trials, Tennessee case, Meta's 13-plus policy and the California AG's injunction-first remedy, can be stated with high assurance. The internal-incentive and enforcement-failure assertions should be treated as untested allegations until exhibits, cross-examination or a second independent account appear. One ledger item also asserted the fake-account quotation was truncated in the supplied material, which the source body contradicts, a reminder to verify against the text rather than the ledger note.
leadership
A safety engineer says he briefed Zuckerberg 100 times. The escalation trail is now evidence.1 distinct publisher
product
Meta's first witness told a jury the blocker on teen safety was culture, not code1 distinct publisher
leadership
Meta's glasses crackdown removed nine videos after a reporter sent the links1 distinct publisher
leadership
Meta paid parenting influencers while lawmakers debated teen bans. Call it lobbying.1 distinct publisher
Distinct publishers with included, body-backed reporting in this cluster.