A high stakes legal battle over child safety began this week as a former Meta executive took the stand, alleging that the tech giant knowingly ignored systemic failures protecting young users. Arturo Bejar, a former senior engineering and product leader, testified that the company adopted a culture where safety and security were treated as an afterthought. According to Bejar, Meta followed a philosophy of moving fast and breaking things, prioritizing rapid growth and deployment over the wellbeing of its youngest members.
The testimony became deeply personal when Bejar described why he originally returned to the company in 2019. He recounted how his fourteen year old daughter began receiving explicit messages and requests for sexual photos shortly after joining Instagram. When he discovered that reporting these incidents was nearly impossible for her, Bejar realized there was a fundamental breakdown within the organization. He claimed that despite detecting significant harms through internal research, Meta failed to implement effective changes to protect children.
Bejar further alleged that Meta maintained a don’t ask, don’t tell policy regarding children under thirteen using the platforms. He estimated that he spoke with CEO Mark Zuckerberg at least one hundred times during his tenure, suggesting that top leadership was aware of these ongoing vulnerabilities but chose not to act decisively on them. These claims paint a picture of a corporate environment where user acquisition consistently outweighed the necessity of safeguarding minors from predators and harassment.
In response, lawyers representing Meta argued that the accusations rely on cherry picked statements and skewed data. During opening arguments, defense counsel emphasized that Meta has developed numerous tools to help users manage their screen time and recently removed six hundred thousand accounts belonging to underage users. They challenged the notion of social media addiction as a scientifically proven fact and questioned whether standard features like multiple account options could truly be considered unconscionable or unfair business practices.