The news: Meta is being fined $25 billion in New Mexico over claims that it misled consumers on Facebook’s privacy and content policies.

• The decision comes about four weeks after Meta was determined to have made false and deceptive claims to users about its data practices.
• That fine resulted from a trial alleging that political consultancy Cambridge Analytica purchased personal data on millions of Facebook users.
• Meta was also found to have violated its own content policies, including a commitment to preventing hate speech on its platforms.
• Jurors determined that Meta committed over 43 million violations of New Mexico consumer laws.

This isn’t the first time Meta has come under fire for its data practices: The FTC imposed a $5 billion penalty and new Facebook privacy restrictions in 2019 over claims that Meta deceived users about “their ability to control the privacy of their personal information.”

More recently, Meta settled for $17 billion over claims that its platforms harm children through addictive designs and data privacy practices affecting minors. That resulted in a $9.89 billion legal charge in Q3, when Meta reported negative free cash flow of $2.12 billion.

Why it matters: Meta’s case highlights how mishandling personal data can erode consumer trust. Platforms aren’t the only parties responsible for data privacy: Marketers face frequent challenges in ensuring their data practices meet consumer expectations.

• US consumers’ concerns about data privacy rose from 60% to 70% YoY between 2024 and 2025, per Deloitte.
• Fears about digital tracking increased from 55% to 67% in that period.
• Yet marketing teams are frequently disconnected from the functions responsible for managing privacy risks: Just 8% of privacy and data protection executives globally say that marketing, sales, and customer relations teams—which often depend on consumer data—collaborate with their privacy office, according to ISACA.
• And marketers frequently buy and use data they get from data brokers to run personalized campaigns. Some of these brokers have been found to have opaque or non-adherent privacy practices, such as Acxiom, who last year came under fire for selling millions of consumers’ data without consent.