Amid ongoing litigation concerning alleged impacts on teens’ safety and mental health by social media giant Meta, the company’s legal team is under scrutiny for their use of attorney-client privilege to restrict information disclosure. The plaintiffs accuse Meta of misusing this legal protection, suggesting a ‘culture of privilege abuse’ intended to conceal sensitive research.
Controversial Merchandise
Critics point to a document recently unsealed in court which reveals Meta’s internal team for Instagram’s “Teen Accounts” had ordered baseball caps emblazoned with “a/c priv.” This merchandise has been highlighted by plaintiffs as emblematic of the alleged protective culture at Meta, reportedly used to avoid revealing internal research findings on teen safety. These issues were initially brought to the fore when data on Instagram’s impact on adolescent well-being leaked in 2021.
Judicial Concerns and Document Re-examinations
In prior rulings, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers criticised some of the privilege claims by Meta’s legal team. She described their approach to redacting information as “entirely inappropriate” in specific instances, such as categorizing business decisions about whether to publish data as legal advice, predominantly when the discussions aimed to avert data leaks instead.
Meta’s Compliance Actions
Despite removing the attorney-client designation from roughly 65,000 documents after the conclusion of discovery in April 2025, the plaintiffs contend that Meta’s timing rendered these documents unusable for depositions. They now advocate for a neutral third party to spearhead the ongoing review of privileged documents, a proposal that would see Meta bearing the associated costs. Meanwhile, Meta seeks an extension until the year’s end to reassess remaining privilege claims in their trove of documents.
Reporting based on coverage first published by theverge.com.