Meta Platforms is facing allegations that it hid internal research showing that its social media services contributed to negative effects on user well-being. The claims come from newly released court filings tied to a lawsuit brought by school districts across the United States. According to the filings, the company carried out an internal study called Project Mercury to measure the effects of stepping away from Facebook and Instagram. The study, conducted with the research firm Nielsen, asked selected users to deactivate their accounts for one week. The results described in the filings indicate that many participants experienced improvements in anxiety, depression and social comparison during that period.
The documents also state that Meta discontinued the project after reviewing the findings and later told members of Congress that it could not determine whether its services harmed teenage girls.
The court filings assert that internal research teams considered the study credible. According to the documents, some employees expressed concern that releasing the findings could damage the company’s public standing. One employee reportedly compared the decision to suppress the information to historical cases in which the tobacco industry concealed evidence about health risks. The lawsuit claims that internal discussions showed hesitation about adopting features intended to reduce harmful experiences if those changes were likely to reduce user engagement. Plaintiffs argue that these choices illustrate a business priority that placed advertising revenue and engagement metrics ahead of user well-being, particularly among younger audiences.
The filings also state that Meta produced internal analyses that acknowledged potential links between extended use of its platforms and negative mental health trends among young users. Court documents further claim that Meta maintained strict requirements for removing accounts associated with trafficking behaviour, which plaintiffs interpret as an effort to avoid losing measurable user activity. These points are presented as part of a broader argument that the company failed to act on evidence that its products could contribute to harmful outcomes. Meta denied the allegations and said that Project Mercury was stopped because of methodological weaknesses that limited its ability to support clear conclusions. The company said the lawsuit relies on selective quotations and does not capture the range of its safety and well-being efforts. It stated that it continues to invest in tools intended to reduce harmful interactions, support breaks from extended use and promote safer experiences for younger audiences.
A hearing is scheduled for January 2026 in Northern California, where the court will decide whether the case meets the requirements to move forward. The lawsuit forms part of a wider examination by policymakers and regulators who have raised concerns about the effects of social media on younger users. The outcome may influence future standards for transparency around research conducted by large technology companies. It may also shape expectations for how platforms should assess and address evidence related to well-being and mental health. As regulators consider new requirements for online services that attract younger audiences, the case involving Meta is likely to play a significant role in ongoing discussions about platform responsibility, data transparency and the management of risks associated with social media use.