Zuckerberg Contemplates New Approach to Meta’s Social Issue Research Following Controversy
Just a day after a major report revealed Meta’s troubling findings on the impact of Instagram on teen girls’ mental health, CEO Mark Zuckerberg began to question whether the company should rethink its approach to researching the potential harms of its platforms. In an email dated September 15, 2021, addressed to key executives including then-COO Sheryl Sandberg and global affairs head Nick Clegg, Zuckerberg expressed his concerns. The previous day, a report based on documents from a whistleblower—later identified as Frances Haugen—highlighted that “32% of teen girls said that when they felt bad about their bodies, Instagram made them feel worse.” The subject line of Zuckerberg’s email read: “Social issue research and analytics — privileged and confidential.”
This email was made public as part of a legal case led by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, which accuses Meta of misleadingly presenting its products as safe for teens while being aware of harmful design choices that allegedly contributed to addiction and facilitated child predators. The AG’s office claimed that revealing the harms identified by Meta would have clarified the misleading nature of its public statements about platform safety. A Meta spokesperson stated that the company is committed to transparent, industry-leading research and continues to use these insights to implement meaningful changes, such as introducing teen accounts with built-in protections and providing parents with tools to manage their teens’ experiences.
The email is just one glimpse into the internal discussions expected to emerge during the trial, which is part of a series of similar cases in California. Opening statements in the New Mexico case are anticipated to begin next week.
In his email, Zuckerberg noted that other companies seemed to avoid public scrutiny on social issues by conducting less proactive research into the harms associated with their platforms. He pointed out that “Apple, for example, doesn’t seem to study any of this stuff,” adding that they don’t have anyone reviewing or moderating content and lack a reporting mechanism in iMessage. He observed that Apple’s approach places the responsibility on users, which has allowed them to avoid the scrutiny that Meta faces due to its more extensive reporting of child sexual abuse material (CSAM). He remarked, “when Apple did try to do something about CSAM, they were roundly criticized for it, which may encourage them to double down on their original approach.” This likely referred to Apple’s earlier announcement of features aimed at protecting kids, which raised privacy concerns and was later retracted.
Zuckerberg also compared Meta’s situation to that of other platforms like YouTube, Twitter, and Snap, noting that they take a similar but less rigorous approach to research. He suggested that YouTube seems to intentionally avoid attention, while Twitter and Snap may lack the resources for comprehensive research. Many platforms have publicly shared their own research and initiatives aimed at improving safety, such as YouTube’s Youth and Families Advisory Committee and Snap’s Digital Well-Being Index.
Zuckerberg felt that the public reaction to Meta’s internal research was unjust. He stated, “I think we should be commended for the work we do to study, understand, and improve social issues on our platforms.” He expressed frustration that the media often uses research to imply that Meta isn’t doing enough, rather than recognizing its commitment to addressing these issues seriously.
In response to Zuckerberg’s email, several executives supported the idea of continuing research into social issues, despite the potential for negative public perception. Then-VP of central products Javier Olivan acknowledged the challenges posed by leaks but emphasized the importance of understanding these issues to improve products. Then-VP of product, choice, and competition David Ginsberg agreed, highlighting the value of internal work for enhancing user experience.
A few days later, Guy Rosen, a product executive focused on integrity, proposed various options for reorganizing the company’s approach to internal and external research, weighing the pros and cons of each. These options ranged from centralizing sensitive research teams to potentially disbanding them and outsourcing the work. Ultimately, executives leaned toward centralizing research teams, planning to announce this change shortly after Instagram CEO Adam Mosseri’s upcoming congressional testimony. Mosseri, who was added to the email thread, expressed concern that announcing the changes after his testimony would appear as if he was hiding something. Meta ultimately announced the changes before Mosseri’s testimony and stated that it continues to study sensitive topics like teen well-being.
In his initial email, Zuckerberg lamented that internal document leaks hinder the company’s ability to address these issues effectively, suggesting that this might explain why the rest of the industry has opted for a different approach.
