A newly surfaced internal study at Meta may reshape how marketers and regulators think about digital well-being tools.
Presented during a landmark social media addiction trial in Los Angeles, the research — dubbed Project MYST — suggests that parental controls like screen time limits and content restrictions do little to reduce teens’ compulsive social media use.
This article explores what Project MYST revealed, how it’s being used in court against Meta, and what it means for marketers navigating youth platforms and safety standards.
Short on time?
Here’s a table of contents for quick access:
- What is Project MYST and why it matters
- What the research found about compulsive teen behavior
- Why this matters for marketers working with youth platforms
Patrecia Meliana
What is Project MYST and why it matters
An internal Meta research initiative called Project MYST — short for Meta and Youth Social Emotional Trends — has taken center stage in an ongoing lawsuit alleging that social platforms harm teens’ mental health. Introduced during testimony in Los Angeles County Superior Court, the study was developed in partnership with the University of Chicago and surveyed 1,000 teens and their parents.
The key takeaway? Parental supervision, including time limits and content restrictions, had no measurable effect on teens’ compulsive social media behavior. That claim has become a flashpoint in the trial, where plaintiff “Kaley” and her mother are suing Meta, YouTube, and previously TikTok and Snap, for allegedly designing “addictive and dangerous” products.
The implications go beyond the courtroom. If Meta knew its controls didn’t work — and didn’t act on that knowledge — it could face not only legal consequences but regulatory scrutiny over transparency and product design for minors.
What the research found about compulsive teen behavior
According to the findings discussed in court, Project MYST concluded that “parental and household factors have little association with teens’ reported levels of attentiveness to their social media use.” In simpler terms, even engaged and proactive parenting did not reduce compulsive use. This conclusion was reportedly agreed upon by both parents and teens in the survey.
Furthermore, teens who had experienced adverse life events — such as bullying, trauma, or family instability — showed even lower ability to regulate their social media habits. Meta’s lawyers attempted to contextualize this by pointing to the plaintiff’s personal background, suggesting emotional challenges came from real-life stressors, not the platforms themselves.
Instagram head Adam Mosseri, when questioned under oath, said he couldn’t recall the study, despite documents suggesting he had greenlit it. He also avoided the term “addiction,” opting for “problematic use,” which he defined as spending more time on Instagram “than they feel good about.”
From a legal standpoint, the study’s non-publication and lack of follow-up warnings or parental advisories could be seen as omission of risk knowledge — a detail that plaintiff attorneys are leaning on heavily.
Why this matters for marketers working with youth platforms
For marketers whose strategies involve platforms like Instagram, TikTok, or Snap, Project MYST raises important considerations:
- Platform risk is rising
If courts side with plaintiffs in lawsuits like this one, expect tighter scrutiny and possible restrictions on how platforms handle teen engagement — including content algorithms and notification design.
- Transparency is a growing expectation
Brands operating in youth spaces must ask tougher questions about platform integrity. Tools labeled “safety features” may not be backed by evidence — and marketers may be held to higher ethical standards when promoting youth-facing content.
- Audience behavior isn’t always controllable
The findings confirm that even the most well-meaning parental interventions may not reduce compulsive behavior — especially among emotionally vulnerable teens. Marketers must balance engagement tactics with safeguards that don’t exploit these vulnerabilities.
- Regulation is inevitable
Whether via legal action or policy shifts, pressure is mounting for social platforms to offer evidence-based tools and greater accountability for how their algorithms affect young users.
While Meta insists that parents still ask for and use digital monitoring tools, Project MYST suggests the company may need to reconsider what those tools actually achieve — and how they’re communicated to the public.
Project MYST may become a turning point in how social platforms approach youth safety and design. If the court agrees that Meta withheld critical insights from parents and users, the case could catalyze stricter regulations, reshape product development, and spark a broader industry reckoning.
For marketers, the lesson is clear: transparency, platform ethics, and audience protection are no longer just legal risks — they’re brand risks too.
Leave a Reply