Meta pulls Facebook ads recruiting for social media addiction lawsuits
Meta Removes Ads for Social Media Addiction Lawsuits
Meta has taken down advertisements from law firms on its social media platforms that are seeking clients for future lawsuits tied to social media dependency. The company, which owns Facebook, recently faced two major legal challenges, including a pivotal case in California where a young woman won a significant verdict against Meta and YouTube for her childhood struggles with social media addiction.
Legal Setbacks Prompt Meta’s Actions
Following the loss of these cases, Meta emphasized its stance in a statement: “We will not permit trial lawyers to gain from our platforms while asserting they are detrimental.” The first case, in California, involved a woman who received $6 million in damages for her childhood social media addiction, with Meta and Google sharing the liability. The second case, in New Mexico, resulted in a $375 million judgment for misleading users about the safety of platforms for children.
“This is yet another instance of Meta attempting to shape the narrative and evade responsibility,” said Emily Jeffcott, a representative of Morgan & Morgan, one of the law firms targeted by Meta’s policy. She argued that the company’s efforts to block ads could be better directed toward enhancing user safety through tools that limit excessive use and identify underage users.”
Ad Campaigns Across Multiple Platforms
Ads from firms like Morgan & Morgan and Sokolove Law were deactivated in “dozens” of instances, according to Axios. These ads appeared on Facebook and Instagram, with some also reaching Threads and Meta’s Audience Network, which facilitates ad campaigns on external platforms such as mobile apps. Despite the removals, several ads remain active in Meta’s Ad Library, including one highlighting potential downsides of social media and claiming to advocate for users.
Meta’s Policy Justification
Meta’s advertising standards state that it can remove ads if they “negatively impact our relationship with users” or “promote content, services, or activities conflicting with our competitive position, interests, or advertising philosophy.” The two U.S. cases have signaled a broader trend, raising the likelihood of similar lawsuits proceeding through the courts.
While Snap and TikTok were initially named as defendants in the California case, both companies settled before the trial. Meta has expressed its intent to appeal both rulings, disputing the outcomes. Additional reporting by Osmond Chia.
