Mark Zuckerberg is attempting to shield himself from personal liability in a series of lawsuits claiming that Meta Platforms Inc. and other social media firms have exploited children by fostering addiction to their products. The Meta CEO presented his arguments during a hearing in California federal court on Friday, but the judge did not deliver an immediate ruling. If the court rules in Zuckerberg’s favor, he would be dismissed as a personal defendant in the lawsuits, while the allegations against Meta itself would remain unchanged.
Establishing personal accountability for Zuckerberg may prove difficult due to longstanding corporate traditions that protect executives from being held liable, particularly in larger corporations where decision-making processes are complex. Should Zuckerberg, who co-founded Facebook over 20 years ago while at Harvard, face legal setbacks, it could open the door for similar lawsuits against other CEOs in mass personal injury claims.
The lawsuits against Zuckerberg arise from accusations by minors and their parents, asserting that he disregarded multiple warnings regarding the safety of Instagram and Facebook for children, opting not to disclose those findings publicly.
The cases targeting Zuckerberg represent only a fraction of over 1,000 lawsuits filed in state and federal courts against Meta, alongside Alphabet Inc.’s Google, ByteDance Ltd.’s TikTok, and Snap Inc. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who is overseeing the federal litigation, has recently allowed some claims to advance against these companies while dismissing others.
Plaintiffs argue that, as the public figurehead of Meta, Zuckerberg bears the obligation to “speak fully and truthfully on the risks Meta’s platforms pose to children’s health.”
In a court filing, the plaintiffs’ attorneys cited a line from Spider-Man comics, stating, “With great power comes great responsibility,” and added that “Unfortunately, Mr. Zuckerberg has not lived up to that maxim.”
Despite these claims, Zuckerberg maintains that personal accountability cannot be assigned solely based on his position as CEO. His legal team contends that he had no duty to vet or disclose the safety reports that were allegedly brought to his attention.
A Meta spokesperson declared in a statement that there is substantial legal precedent indicating that serving as an executive does not automatically result in personal liability for the actions of a corporation. The spokesperson asserted that the claims against Zuckerberg should be entirely dismissed.
During the hearing, Judge Rogers inquired of the plaintiffs about whether there was a legal requirement for Zuckerberg to disclose safety information without a “special relationship” with the users of his platforms. The plaintiffs contended that Zuckerberg had a responsibility to the users of Facebook and Instagram due to his prominent role within the company; however, Rogers pushed them to provide specific legal references supporting this stance.
Rogers seemed to show more empathy towards the plaintiffs’ arguments that Zuckerberg might be held accountable for personally concealing information in his capacity as a corporate officer at Meta, questioning how he could avoid personal liability if it is understood that Meta had an obligation to reveal safety data.
The judge further examined how laws concerning corporate officer accountability, which differ by state, pertain to Zuckerberg’s situation.
Zuckerberg, who is Meta’s principal shareholder with exclusive voting rights, also faces the possibility of personal liability in a separate lawsuit from 2022 related to the Cambridge Analytica data privacy incident, initiated by the attorney general of the District of Columbia.
Assigning blame to an executive for unlawful practices typically requires demonstrating their involvement in daily operations or their awareness of the relevant policies. Liability is generally more accessible to establish within smaller companies, where individual decision-making roles are clear cut. In large corporations, the question of liability often revolves around proving control over decision-making processes.
Social media platforms have recently been under heightened scrutiny regarding their effects on youth mental health and their implementation in spreading inappropriate content. Last month, during a Senate hearing, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley from Missouri challenged Zuckerberg on whether he should personally compensate victims of online sexual exploitation. In response, Zuckerberg issued a rare apology to the families of the victims.
The case is titled In Re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, 22-md-03047, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Oakland).
© 2024 Bloomberg L.P.
(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
