Meta Faces New Allegations of Suppressing Damaging Mental Health Research
Meta faces fresh legal scrutiny over allegations that it deliberately shut down internal research demonstrating that its flagship platforms—Facebook and Instagram—actively harm users’ mental health. The explosive claims emerged from unredacted court filings in an ongoing lawsuit brought by U.S. school districts against Meta and other social media companies.
According to the legal documents, Meta conducted a 2020 internal research project code-named “Project Mercury” in collaboration with survey firm Nielsen. The study examined what happened when users deactivated Facebook, revealing compelling findings: participants who took a week-long break from the platform reported significant reductions in depression, anxiety, loneliness, and feelings of social comparison.
Rather than publishing these results or pursuing further investigation, Meta allegedly terminated the research initiative and internally characterized the negative findings as corrupted by the “existing media narrative” around the company. This decision stands in stark contrast to the scientific validity of the methodology—one internal staffer reportedly insisted the research conclusions were sound and valid.
The allegations draw particular attention to Meta’s public statements before Congress. The filing contends that Meta claimed it lacked the ability to quantify whether its products caused harm to teenage girls, a statement that appears inconsistent with the Project Mercury research.
One researcher’s internal note, cited in the filings, drew a striking parallel to the tobacco industry’s historical practice of conducting research on cigarette harm while withholding that information from the public.
Meta responded to the allegations in a Saturday statement, arguing that the study suffered from flawed methodology and reaffirming the company’s commitment to improving product safety. However, the newly unredacted evidence suggests a more deliberate suppression strategy than a simple methodological concern.
This development marks another chapter in the ongoing legal battles surrounding social media’s impact on adolescent mental health, an issue that has become increasingly central to regulatory and litigation efforts across the United States.