Private Meta deal should not set industry-wide child safety standards, UN experts say

UN experts on Wednesday raised concern over Meta’s proposed multibillion-dollar settlement with US state attorneys general over alleged harms to children and adolescents, warning that privately negotiated agreements should not replace transparent regulation developed with participation from young people and affected communities. The experts described bringing social-media platform design within accountability mechanisms as a significant development. The proposed settlement, announced on August 26, would resolve litigation alleging that Meta had designed features on Facebook and Instagram that encouraged excessive use by children and teenagers while misleading users and families about associated risks. California Attorney General Rob Bonta described the agreement as providing payments of up to $17 billion to participating states over a period of 10 years, alongside extensive changes to how Meta’s platforms operate for users under 18. The agreement remains subject to court approval. State attorneys general began investigating Meta in 2021, and a nationwide coalition sued the company in 2023. The lawsuit alleged that Meta illegally collected data from children under 13, deployed features that encouraged excessive platform use and misrepresented the safety of Facebook and Instagram. The states alleged violations of the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), alongside state laws including California’s False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law. The case survived major pretrial challenges, including Meta’s unsuccessful bid for summary judgment in June 2026, before proceeding to trial in August and later reaching settlement. UN experts Polo Maldonado, Gina Romero and Ana Brian Nougrères warned that measures designed to protect children could create a different set of rights concerns if implemented without adequate safeguards. They singled out age-assurance systems, noting that these may require additional personal data collection or processing, potentially compromising privacy and anonymity. Broad restrictions on platform access, they added, could also limit young people’s rights to expression, association, peaceful assembly and participation. Their concerns extend beyond age verification. The experts cautioned that online-safety policies should not place responsibility primarily on children and parents while leaving platform design, profiling and recommendation systems largely untouched. They called for greater “explainability,” including clearer information about how algorithms determine what young users see and influence their engagement. The experts’ concerns also reflect a broader shift toward rights-based digital governance, under which online safety measures are assessed not only by whether they reduce harm, but also by how they affect privacy, expression, participation and access to information. This approach is consistent with the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child’s General Comment No. 25, which calls for children to be meaningfully involved in developing digital policies affecting them, and with Sustainable Development Goal 16.7, which promotes inclusive and participatory decision-making. In this context, the debate over Meta’s settlement extends beyond platform safety to questions of algorithmic transparency, human-rights due diligence and whether private agreements should shape industry-wide standards without broader public scrutiny. Following the settlement’s court approval, attention will shift to implementation and independent oversight of the safeguards. The UN experts urged states to develop broader evidence-based standards through open consultation, independently assess whether the measures actually reduce harm, and ensure meaningful participation by young people and affected communities in shaping future online-safety rules.