Meta Halts Internal Study on Social Media's Harmful Impacts

Meta stopped internal research that allegedly showed people who quit using Facebook became less depressed and anxious, according to a legal filing released Friday. The social media giant launched the study in late 2019 to explore how its apps affect polarization, news consumption, wellbeing, and daily social interactions, but shut it down when early results suggested taking breaks from Facebook reduced negative mental health symptoms.

The legal filing contains new unredacted information about Meta and relates to high-profile multi-district lawsuits by school districts, parents, and state attorneys general against social media companies including Meta, YouTube, Snapchat, and TikTok. The plaintiffs argue these companies knew their platforms caused psychological harm to children and young people but failed to act while misleading educators and authorities.

The 2019 research, called "Project Mercury," used a random sample of users who stopped using Facebook and Instagram for one month. According to the lawsuit, Meta felt disappointed when initial tests showed people who stopped using Facebook "for a week reported decreased feelings of depression, anxiety, loneliness, and social comparison."

Instead of raising red flags about these findings, Meta chose to halt the research entirely. The lawsuit claims the company never publicly disclosed the study results and "lied to Congress about what it knew."

The filing quotes an unnamed Meta employee who allegedly said: "If the results are bad and we don't publish them and they get leaked, will it look like tobacco companies conducting research and knowing cigarettes are bad then keeping that information to themselves?"

Meta spokesperson Andy Stone strongly disputed these claims, calling them based on "cherry-picked quotes and misleading characterizations." He said the full record shows Meta has spent over a decade listening to parents, researching key issues, and making real changes to protect teens, including built-in protections for teen accounts and parental control tools.

Stone described the 2019 study as flawed, which he said explained the company's disappointment with it. He argued the study simply found that "people who think using Facebook is bad for them felt better when they stopped using it" - confirming other public research showing the same effect.

A Google spokesperson said the lawsuits fundamentally misunderstand how YouTube works, noting it's primarily a streaming service where people watch sports, podcasts, and content creators mainly on TV screens, not a social network for connecting with friends. The company highlighted specialized tools developed for young users with input from child safety experts.

The legal battle highlights growing scrutiny of social media companies' impact on mental health, particularly among young users. But the companies maintain they've been transparent about research and have implemented meaningful protections for younger users.