Translated dutch article https://nos.nl/artikel/2602945-rouwende-ouders-wachten-op-verklaring-zuckerberg-in-socialemediazaak
Grieving Parents Await Zuckerberg’s Testimony in Social Media Case
Merijn Westerhoff Washington Bureau
In the high-profile American lawsuit against social media companies, all eyes today are on Mark Zuckerberg. The founder of Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, is set to testify in a California courtroom.
The case is part of a broader civil proceeding in which more than 1,600 plaintiffs, parents and families taking legal action, argue that the platforms knowingly cause mental harm to young people.
Zuckerberg’s appearance is seen as a pivotal moment in the trial. It is rare for the head of a major tech company to testify in person in a civil case of this scale.
Parents who have lost children to the consequences of social media, ranging from deadly drug deals to bullying that led to suicide, are traveling from across the country to California in the hope of looking the Meta CEO in the eye.
Online Blackmail
Mary Rodee traveled from New York to Los Angeles to see Zuckerberg testify. In 2021, she lost her 15-year-old son to suicide after he became a victim of sextortion, a form of online blackmail in which perpetrators threaten to release intimate material.
Rodee blames tech companies for exposing her child to an unsafe platform they knew was harmful.
Because only a handful of seats are available to the public, entry is limited to those who line up early. Earlier this week, Rodee and other grieving relatives waited outside the courthouse all night. She managed to secure a seat then, but expects her chances of seeing Zuckerberg today to be slimmer.
Still, she believes it is her duty to ensure the gallery is filled with parents. “We need to show ourselves,” she says. “It changes the energy in the courtroom.”
Two years ago, Zuckerberg testified at a hearing in the U.S. Congress. He apologized to grieving families in the audience who had brought photos of their deceased children.
This lawsuit is groundbreaking because the companies are not being sued over specific content, but over the design of their platforms. Features such as infinite scroll and constant notifications allegedly make it nearly impossible not to become addicted.
“Move Fast”
Meta disputes the allegations. “We have made countless decisions to keep teens safe,” the company said in a statement. The case originally also targeted TikTok and Snapchat, but those companies reached settlements.
In Europe, policymakers are closely watching the proceedings. Potential legal breakthroughs in the United States could influence future regulations and liability issues surrounding digital platforms.
For years, Facebook’s motto was “Move fast and break things,” a slogan meant to reassure employees that innovation came first, even if it caused damage.
“The Bullying Never Stopped”
Erin Popolo has no doubt that social media use can cause harm. She lost her 16-year-old daughter, Emily, to suicide during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Emily’s mental health deteriorated sharply as her social media use increased and online bullying intensified. “She used to be able to escape the bullying when she was home,” her mother recalls, “but online it continued 24 hours a day.”
Popolo now campaigns against the harmful effects of social media on young people. She was also present in the California courtroom last week.
During that hearing, an internal 2016 email was discussed in which Zuckerberg wrote about the launch of Facebook’s live video feature. In it, he suggested that informing parents and teachers might undermine the product’s success.
For Popolo, the testimony is painful to hear. “It’s hard to learn that these people were making decisions while already knowing the damage it causes to children.”
Harassment During the Funeral
She also argues that anonymity on social media changes how people treat one another. Even during her daughter’s virtual funeral, streamed because of COVID restrictions, the bullying continued. A minor broke into the Zoom session and posted insulting messages about her daughter.
The incident underscores the seriousness of online abuse. “Parents often underestimate that social media not only gives their child access to the world, but gives the world access to their child.”
A verdict is expected in March. Popolo hopes it will bring meaningful change. Tech companies, she says, are driven by profit. “Move fast and break things,” she says. “And unfortunately, it’s our children who have been broken.”
–
imo the american government is too intertwined and too dependant on big tech companies so they will protect them, I mean they were all at the inauguration and stuff. The american government cares more about those big tech companies than the safety of children or peoples privacy. Clearly.



Let’s say they did. What laws would that break?
Outside of the “deliberately harming children” part?
Yeah, but which law is that? I would be surprised if there was a law as broad and general as “deliberately harming children”. Is there?
JFC…I don’t even live in your shit hole and know the answer.
Child endangerment in the U.S. is a criminal offense, primarily defined by state law and guided by federal standards like CAPTA, involving any act or failure to act by a caregiver that places a child (usually under 18) at imminent risk of serious physical, mental, or emotional harm. It includes neglect, abuse, and exposure to dangerous environments, with penalties ranging from probation to years in prison.
My shit hole? Which hole is that? If you think I live in US you’re wrong.
Second, if you can read you should notice this law specifically covers acts of a caregiver so unless you think Meta has some sort of a custody over all children this does not apply.
😂😂
Designing a product that is deliberately designed to harm children would fall under “Child Abuse”.
If I made a child’s doll that when being held by a child it stabbed the child, but if being held by an adult it didn’t stab the adult…
So I found this for Child Abuse laws in California:
““As used in this article, “the willful harming or injuring of a child or the endangering of the person or health of a child,” means a situation in which any person willfully causes or permits any child to suffer, or inflicts thereon, unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering, or having the care or custody of any child, willfully causes or permits the person or health of the child to be placed in a situation in which his or her person or health is endangered.””
So you’re saying that Meta would be accused of “willfully causing mental suffering”? Yeah, I can see that. That would be interesting case. I think I would be incredibly hard to prove that Zuck design Instagram or some features specifically to torment kids but maybe they are some emails where he says that.
BTW, would that mean that the parents would be accused of “permitting children to suffer mental suffering”?
Child endangerment is the law. Could also fall under corruption of a minor.
Either way, the rule of law is dead for tech bros so Fuckerberg has nothing to worry about.