Business & Economics
Unsealed Filings Expose Meta’s 2020 ‘Project Mercury’ and Other Concealed Teen-Safety Risks
Newly unsealed Nov 22-23, 2025 court documents in a U.S. school-district lawsuit show Meta killed a 2020 internal study proving a one-week break from Facebook/Instagram lowers users’ depression and anxiety, while executives simultaneously told Congress they lacked such data.
Focusing Facts
- Project Mercury (2020), run with Nielsen, found causal drops in depression, anxiety, loneliness and social-comparison after seven days off Facebook/Instagram.
- Former Instagram safety chief testified Meta’s policy allowed 16 separate sex-trafficking violations before an account faced removal (a “17×” strike threshold).
- Northern District of California court set a hearing for Jan 26 2026 on Meta’s motion to strike the internal documents.
Context
Tech giants burying inconvenient science echoes the tobacco industry’s 1950-90 playbook—internal 1963 Philip Morris memos admitted carcinogenic risk long before the 1998 Master Settlement forced disclosure. Meta’s alleged suppression fits a longer pattern: from Cambridge Analytica (2018) to Frances Haugen’s leaks (2021), growth algorithms have repeatedly trumped safety, reflecting an incentive system where engagement equals revenue and negative externalities are socialized. If courts conclude that knowingly addictive design and concealed harm constitute actionable fraud, this case could mark a regulatory inflection like the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act or 1938 FTC truth-in-advertising rules—redefining platform liability over the next century; if it fizzles, it will reinforce Section 230’s shield and entrench a business model that treats attention as extractive resource. Either way, the filings illuminate how digital platforms, only two decades old, are entering the historical cycle where industrial titans meet public-health law and cultural backlash.
Perspectives
Investigative and watchdog-oriented U.S. tech/policy outlets
e.g., TIME, POLITICO — They present the filings as damning proof that Meta knowingly endangered young users, likening the company to drug pushers or Big Tobacco while detailing alleged sex-trafficking tolerance and manipulation of teens. Sensational framing and heavy use of vivid internal quotes can exaggerate culpability before courts weigh the evidence, boosting audience engagement but relying on snippets that may not show full context.
Business and finance wire-service media
e.g., Yahoo Finance/Reuters, The Financial Express — They relay the lawsuit’s claims but stress that the allegations remain unproven, foregrounding Meta’s statement that the research was flawed and highlighting the possible regulatory and market implications. A ‘both-sides’ tone and reliance on corporate press statements can underplay the gravity of the harms to protect perceived objectivity and cater to investor-minded readers.
International outlets carrying Reuters copy for global audiences
e.g., Asharq Al-Awsat English, GEO TV — They largely reproduce Reuters’ description of the filings, emphasizing the causal link between Facebook use and mental-health harm while noting Meta’s denial, framing the story as part of broader scrutiny of Big Tech. Dependence on syndicated wire content means limited original investigation; this passive relay can amplify allegations without additional verification or local context, potentially oversimplifying complex U.S. litigation.