Allegations that Meta targeted teens with advertisements based on their emotional state have come to light, following former company executive Sarah Wynn-Williams’s testimony before U.S. senators, raising renewed questions about children’s online safety and corporate responsibility in Silicon Valley.
Sarah Wynn-Williams, former director of Global Public Policy for Facebook and author of the book “Careless People,” appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on crime and terrorism, where she detailed how Meta (formerly Facebook) enabled advertisers to reach teens at their most vulnerable. Wynn-Williams, drawing on her experiences documented in her book, described what she called the company’s “careless” disregard for its impact on users, particularly young people, and highlighted her concerns over the behaviors of top executives, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg and former COO Sheryl Sandberg.
The hearing, although largely focused on Meta’s operations in China and previous congressional testimony, also revisited Instagram’s role in children’s well-being—an issue that has attracted congressional scrutiny since 2021. Lawmakers directed pointed questions to Wynn-Williams about Meta’s handling of young users on its platforms.
During questioning from Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Wynn-Williams acknowledged that Facebook actively facilitated ad targeting toward 13- to 17-year-olds when they were experiencing negative emotions, such as feeling “worthless,” “helpless,” or “like a failure.” She explained, “It could identify when they were feeling worthless or helpless or like a failure, and [Meta] would take that information and share it with advertisers. Advertisers understand that when people don’t feel good about themselves, it’s often a good time to pitch a product — people are more likely to buy something.”
Wynn-Williams alleged that the company would relay data about teenagers’ emotional states to advertisers, who could then deliver ads precisely when teens might be more susceptible to marketing messages. She provided examples of this practice, noting that if a teen girl deleted a selfie, it could signal to advertisers an opportunity to promote a beauty product. Similarly, she said, young girls expressing concerns about body confidence might be targeted with weight loss advertisements.
According to Wynn-Williams, Meta was acutely aware of the advertising potential of this demographic. She described 13- to 17-year-olds as a “vulnerable but very valuable” market for advertisers. She recounted an exchange with a Meta business leader who boasted that the company had the “most valuable segment of the population” for advertisers—teens—and even suggested Meta should be “trumpeting it from the rooftops.” Wynn-Williams pushed back on these approaches internally, arguing that a “trillion-dollar company was not short on money and didn’t need to go this route to add a little more to its coffers.”
The hearing also revealed that Meta’s alleged emotional-state-based ad research was not limited to teenagers. Lawmakers presented internal Meta communications, including a screenshot of an internal chat, where a Facebook policy director inquired about research into young mothers’ emotional states. The response affirmed that such research was underway, with an added remark—half-jokingly referencing “morally bankrupt colleagues”—about the scope of similar projects.
Wynn-Williams further emphasized what she saw as hypocrisy among Silicon Valley leaders, stating that many Meta executives refused to allow their own children to use the products they had built. She recalled, “I would say, ‘Oh has your teen used the new product we’re about to launch?’ And they’re like, ‘My teenagers are not allowed on Facebook. I don’t have my teenager on Instagram.’ These executives … they know. They know the harm this product does. They don’t allow their own teenagers to use the products that Meta develops. The hypocrisy is at every level.”
Meta responded to Wynn-Williams’s testimony by issuing a statement denying her allegations, calling them “divorced from reality and riddled with false claims.” The company highlighted recent safety initiatives for teens, particularly on Instagram, referencing the introduction of new Teen Accounts. According to Meta, these accounts incorporate built-in protections limiting contact and content exposure, and require parental permission for teens under 16 to change settings. Additional parental oversight features allow guardians to monitor who their teens are chatting with and to impose daily usage limits or restrictions during specific times, such as school hours or at night.
In addressing the claims about emotional-state-based targeting, Meta referred to a previous 2017 statement asserting that any market analysis referencing users’ emotional states relied on anonymous, aggregated data and “was never used to target ads.”
The controversy emerges amid ongoing congressional investigations into Meta’s impact on children and vulnerable populations, underscoring persistent concern from lawmakers and the public about the safety of young people online and the responsibilities of major technology companies.
