Former Meta Engineer Testifies That Leadership Ignored Child Safety Warnings

Arturo Béjar, a former Meta safety engineer, testified before a federal jury in Oakland, California, in August 2026, alleging that the company's leadership systematically ignored warnings about risks to children. The testimony is a central component of a landmark trial brought by 29 state attorneys general who claim Meta intentionally designed its platforms to be addictive to minors.

Béjar testified that he briefed Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg on product issues at least 100 times during his tenure. Despite these warnings, Béjar alleged that Meta operated under a "don't ask, don't tell" philosophy regarding users under 13, prioritizing corporate profits over the safety of young users. He further testified that Meta deliberately substituted the term "problematic use" for "addiction" to avoid meeting academic thresholds for addiction.

According to Béjar, the company's internal data revealed severe vulnerabilities; one internal survey found that 1 in 8 Instagram users aged 13-15 had experienced unwanted sexual advances on the platform within a single week. Béjar stated that he felt Zuckerberg "created a false and misleading impression of Facebook's commitment to young people."

Legal and Regulatory Context

Béjar previously served as the director of engineering on Facebook's protect and care team from 2009 to 2015 and later returned as a consultant between 2019 and 2021. His testimony follows a pattern of whistleblower disclosures and comes amid significant legal setbacks for Meta, including a $567 million ruling in New Mexico regarding the company's failure to shield minors from sexual predators and mental health harms.

The current lawsuit alleges that Meta violated the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) by collecting data on children under the age of 13 without obtaining parental consent. California Deputy Attorney General Megan O'Neill told the jury that while Meta claimed to prioritize safety, "it hid the reality that when it came time to make a decision, time and again profits won."

Industry Implications

This trial represents one of the most significant legal threats to Meta's business model to date. Some estimates suggest the company could face financial penalties as high as $1.4 trillion if the state attorneys general prevail. Beyond the monetary cost, a ruling against Meta could force a fundamental redesign of how social media platforms are engineered for minors.

Regulators are specifically looking at the mechanisms of engagement that drive addictive behavior and the transparency of safety data reported to the public. If the court finds that Meta intentionally misled the public or regulators about the prevalence of child harm, it could trigger stricter federal oversight of algorithmic design.

What's Next

The court will now weigh Béjar's testimony against Meta's defense that it has consistently invested in safety tools. The outcome of the Oakland trial will likely set a legal precedent for other pending litigations regarding the duty of care social media companies owe to underage users. Observers are watching to see if the verdict will mandate independent auditing of safety metrics or force the removal of specific addictive features for users under 18.