Meta Accused of Halting Internal Research on Mental Health Risks of Facebook and Instagram

Meta is facing new scrutiny after unredacted court filings revealed that the company stopped internal research showing Facebook and Instagram could negatively impact users’ mental health. According to documents disclosed in a lawsuit brought by U.S. school districts, Meta canceled a 2020 study—code-named “Project Mercury”—after early findings suggested that taking a week-long break from the platforms led to reduced depression, anxiety, loneliness, and social comparison.

The study, conducted with Nielsen, reportedly provided causal evidence that Meta’s products could harm users’ mental well-being. Instead of publishing the results or expanding the research, Meta allegedly dismissed the findings as being influenced by negative media coverage. Internal messages cited in the filing show staff privately acknowledged the study’s validity, with one researcher comparing Meta’s response to the tobacco industry hiding health risks.

Despite this, Meta executives publicly told Congress they had no way to measure potential harms to teenage users. In response to the allegations, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said the study was flawed and emphasized the company’s long-standing efforts to improve teen safety across its platforms.

The accusations form part of a broader lawsuit filed by Motley Rice against Meta, TikTok, Google, and Snapchat. The plaintiffs claim these companies knowingly concealed product risks from parents, educators, and users while encouraging greater youth engagement. Allegations include ignoring underage use, failing to address child exploitation, and deprioritizing safety measures that could hinder growth.

Meta is also accused of allowing repeated attempts at sex trafficking before removing accounts, delaying action against child predators, and deprioritizing child safety initiatives—even at the executive level. Stone disputed these claims, calling them misleading and insisting that Meta’s safety measures are effective.

While the internal documents referenced in the filing remain sealed pending a court decision, the case continues to intensify scrutiny of social media’s impact on youth mental health.