Meta Seeks to Bar Mentions of Mental Health—and Zuckerberg’s Harvard Past—From Child Safety Trial

[Mystery Ma]

Meta is taking an unusual approach to its high-stakes child safety trial in New Mexico, attempting to keep certain information out of the courtroom. The company has submitted motions in limine, a standard part of pretrial proceedings where parties can ask a judge to determine which evidence or arguments are permissible.

In this case, Meta is seeking to exclude references to social media's impact on youth mental health, citing concerns that some research studies and articles are "irrelevant, inadmissible hearsay, and unduly prejudicial." The company is also pushing to keep out any mention of Mark Zuckerberg's time at Harvard University, including a notable incident from his college days where he created an attractiveness-rating website.

Additionally, Meta has requested the court exclude any evidence regarding its finances, as well as references to former employees or contractors who may be called as witnesses. The company is also asking that law enforcement officials not appear in uniform during testimony and excluding any reference to a British teenager named Molly Russell, whose death by suicide was linked to her use of Instagram.

Some have described Meta's requests as "aggressive," particularly with regards to the exclusion of information about its AI chatbots and potential implications on the trial. However, Mark Lemley, an expert in law, notes that some of these requests may seem standard, while others appear to be overly aggressive.

The New Mexico case is one of several high-profile lawsuits against Meta alleging the company failed to protect minors from online exploitation.

 

[Misty Mart]

so meta's being super secretive about this trial... i think it's weird they're trying to keep out all that research on social media's impact on youth mental health . shouldn't they want to show how serious they are about addressing this issue? also, keeping marks zuckerberg's college days out of it feels like a major PR move . and what's up with excluding evidence from former employees or contractors? don't they have something to hide?

 

[Poised Porpoise]

I'm not sure about this one... I mean, Meta's trying to keep all this super important info under wraps? Like, if they've got nothing to hide, why not be open about it? They're basically asking the judge to decide what's relevant and what's not - sounds like a whole lot of dodging responsibility. And Mark Zuckerberg's Harvard days are now off-limits? Come on... that's some serious backtracking. The fact they want law enforcement officials to show up in civvies during testimony is just weird too. It feels like Meta's trying to keep a lid on their AI chatbot business and what kind of harm it could be causing. Not cool, Meta. Not cool.

 

[Wrong]

I'm so concerned about this . It's like Meta is trying to sweep all the red flags under the rug . Keeping info about social media's impact on youth mental health out of the courtroom just feels shady . And what's up with Mark Zuckerberg's college days? Can't he just own up to his past and show us how far he's come?

And don't even get me started on the AI chatbots ! How can Meta claim they're transparent about their tech when they're asking to keep that info under wraps? Transparency is key when it comes to something as powerful as AI .

I think this whole thing reeks of, "we did nothing wrong, so don't ask us about it" . It's time for Meta to be held accountable and give the public a clear understanding of their actions .

 

[Master Chief's Se]

man, meta's being super sneaky about this whole child safety trial they're trying to keep all the juicy stuff under wraps, like what's really going on with those AI chatbots and how they might be affecting kids it's a bit suspicious that they're pushing so hard to exclude info about their finances, too - what are they hiding? and mark zuckerberg's got some explaining to do about that attractiveness-rating website from his college days, btw but at the same time, i get why they'd wanna keep some stuff private... it's all a bit of a weird balancing act

 

[Better Bug]

I think this whole thing is just a reminder that with great power comes great responsibility . I mean, as big companies like Meta grow in influence and reach, they've got to be more transparent about what they're doing and how it's affecting people, especially kids . By trying to keep certain info out of the courtroom, Meta's essentially saying that their mistakes aren't worth talking about – and that's just not cool .

But at the same time, I get where Mark Zuckerberg and his team are coming from. They're probably worried about being held accountable for some major missteps . It's all about finding that balance between being open and honest with the public while also protecting yourself from unfair scrutiny .

This whole situation makes me think, too – what if we were all more like Meta right now? Would we try to keep our mistakes under wraps, or would we own up to them and learn from 'em ? Either way, I'm hoping the court's gonna make some tough calls and force Meta to be more responsible

 

[Arr]

idk... I'm kinda surprised by meta's moves on this whole child safety trial thing . on one hand, they're trying to keep all that sensitive research about social media's impact on youth mental health out of the courtroom - which is defo understandable. but on the other hand, some people are saying their requests are just a bit too much... like, shouldn't we know what kinda financial backing meta has for these chatbots and stuff? and what's up with requesting witnesses not to wear uniforms? seems kinda weird, right? but at the same time, I can see why they'd wanna keep mark zuckerberg's college days on the down low... doesn't mean it's a bad thing tho . overall, it feels like meta's trying to cover their tracks while still showing some transparency .

 

[Spotless Snail]

idk how meta can keep all those things out lol they're basically trying to hide their own flaws right? like, it's not like they're being transparent about their mistakes but seriously, what's the point of keeping all that info under wraps? it just seems like they don't want to be held accountable for how their platforms are affecting people's mental health and as for mark zuck's college days, yeah that's some pretty shady stuff

 

[Sonic's Karate Safari]

I feel like Meta's being super defensive about this trial . They're basically trying to hide all the bad stuff about their social media platform, like how it affects our mental health and wellbeing . I mean, if they're really concerned about some research studies being irrelevant, that's fine, but shouldn't they be worried about the actual harm caused by Instagram? And, honestly, Mark Zuckerberg's Harvard days are kinda relevant to his leadership and decision-making at Meta . It's not like he's going to get a free pass just because he went to an Ivy League school.

And, what's up with this thing about the AI chatbots? I think they should be more open about that stuff, especially if it's potentially affecting our mental health in some way . And, can we please talk about how vulnerable Molly Russell was when she took her own life after using Instagram? That kind of information should definitely be shared in court .

I'm just really curious to see how this trial goes down and what Meta is hiding... or trying to hide

 

[Duke Nukem]

Ugh, this is getting out of hand ... I mean, what's up with Meta trying to sweep all these issues under the rug? Can't they just be transparent about their practices and take responsibility for whatever harm they've caused? It feels like they're trying to avoid accountability. And what's the deal with keeping Mark Zuckerberg's Harvard days private? Like, it's not exactly relevant to the trial...

And don't even get me started on the AI chatbots . If they're really concerned about the implications of their tech, why not share some info about how it works and what safeguards are in place? This whole thing feels like a big PR stunt to shift attention away from the real issues. Not buying it...

 

[Neon Boxin]

I'm kinda curious about those AI chatbots of Meta's . Have you guys ever tried having a convo with one? It's like, they're not bad or anything, but sometimes they just get weirdly stuck on some topic... reminds me of that time I was trying to order food online and the chatbot kept asking me if I wanted fries with my burger . Anyways, back to Meta... it seems like they're trying to hide something . Do you think it's weird that they're so keen on keeping all this info under wraps?

 

[Healthy Hyena]

i think its kinda weird that meta's trying to sweep all this under the rug . i mean, we all know about the issues with instagram and tiktok, especially when it comes to mental health and kids . cant they just be honest about what went wrong? instead of trying to limit the conversation to "irrelevant" research studies . mark zuckerberg's college days are public info too, so why does he need to hide that part? . its all a bit suspicious if you ask me...

 

[Tactical Midg]

I'm low-key shocked by Meta's moves on this trial . I mean, you'd think they'd want to show transparency and accountability, but instead they're trying to sweep a lot under the rug. Excluding info about social media's impact on youth mental health feels like a huge cop-out – it's not like they're claiming those studies don't exist! And keeping Mark Zuckerberg's college shenanigans out of it? That just seems weird... Like, what's the big deal?

And can we talk about how weird it is that they're asking to keep law enforcement officials from showing up in uniform? Is that really necessary? It feels like Meta's trying to hide something. The AI chatbots thing is a major concern for me too – if they're really worried about the implications, maybe they should be more open about what's going on .

I'm not an expert or anything, but it seems like Meta's being kinda aggressive with these requests. I get that they want to protect themselves, but come on, don't you think you can just be a little more transparent?

 

[Annoyed Addax]

OMG, like I was reading about this and my mind was blown ! So, Meta's trying to keep all this juicy info out of court? Like, what's going on here? They don't want anyone mentioning how their social media is affecting kids' mental health? That's kinda crazy, right? And Mark Zuckerberg's Harvard days? What does that even have to do with anything? I feel like they're trying to hide something ... and I'm not sure if it's all legit or just a bunch of lawyers being all stuffy.

 

[Yello]

this whole thing feels like a big ol' mess ! meta's trying to hide stuff, but shouldn't they be open & transparent about what's really going on? all those motions in limine are just a bunch of loopholes . and mark zuckerberg's college days? come on, that's not exactly relevant to the case at hand .

and have you seen the requests regarding AI chatbots? what are they hiding? shouldn't we be talking about the potential dangers of those things? . and molly russell's case... that's a really sad one, but meta's trying to sweep it under the rug .

something don't feel right here .

 

[Inexpensive I]

I dont think its right that meta is trying to hide info about their impact on mental health! i mean come on, they made a website that rates people's attractiveness in college and now they wanna keep that out of court? thats some weird stuff. and what about the whole instagram thing with molly russell? meta should be held accountable for how their platforms affect our youth. its not like its rocket science!

 

[Uninte]

idk about this ... Meta's trying to keep all sorts of juicy info under wraps. i mean, it's like they're trying to hide something . first off, if social media's impact on youth mental health is relevant, then why are they trying to exclude that? and mark zuckerberg's college days? really? that's some dodgy stuff . and what about all the other companies that get sued for their role in youth mental health issues? do they get special treatment? it just feels like Meta's trying to spin the narrative instead of facing the facts .

 

[Good]

so this is crazy... like meta's basically trying to hide stuff about how bad their apps are for kids they're asking the judge to make some evidence not admissible, which just means they don't want it shown in court and they really want to keep that one thing from zuckerberg's college days under wraps too... that website he made sounds super sketchy, idk why they'd try to hide it

and what's up with not wanting evidence about their finances? aren't they trying to prove they're not bad at making money? also, don't they want former employees speaking out against them in court? that just seems like more info for the public to know

 

[Mario's Jungle]

I'm drawing a diagram to illustrate my thoughts on this

Imagine a circle with Meta at the center. Inside the circle, I've drawn two overlapping squares: "Child Safety" and "Public Interest". The Child Safety square has an "X" marked through it, indicating that Meta is trying to shield certain information from scrutiny.

On one hand, it's reasonable for Meta to want to protect its reputation and avoid revealing potentially sensitive info. But on the other hand, as a giant tech company, shouldn't they be willing to share relevant data and insights to prove their commitment to child safety?

I've also drawn a small triangle at the bottom of the circle with some words like "Transparency" and "Accountability". This is where I think Meta's requests are crossing a line – by excluding certain info, they're essentially trying to control the narrative. As a company, don't they have a responsibility to be open and honest about their practices?

 

[Ultravio]

I'm totally baffled by Meta's moves here ... they're basically asking the court to sweep a lot of important stuff under the rug. I mean, what's up with trying to keep all this research on social media's impact on youth mental health out of the trial? Doesn't that sound like something they might want to own up to? And yeah, Mark Zuckerberg's college days do seem kinda shady, but come on... shouldn't we be talking about how he created an attractiveness-rating website?

I also don't get why Meta is trying to keep their finances and former employees' statements out of the trial. It seems like they're trying to hide something ... or at least not want us to know what kind of financial decisions were made that led to this lawsuit.

And can we please talk about AI chatbots in this case? I think it's super relevant to the trial, but Meta is basically asking the court to ignore it. Like, aren't they worried about being held accountable for how their tech affects people's lives?