GoKawiilAround a dozen parents huddled in the dim hallway outside the courtroom in February, nervously gripping paper tickets. They were glaring at a gray tote bag held by a member of the court staff — the one who’d determine, by lottery, if they made it inside. Pinned on bags and coats, butterfly clips honored children they’d lost, deaths these parents link to their children’s experiences online. The clips were a symbolic gesture chosen to not inadvertently prejudice the jury, which would decide if social media companies could be held liable for the kinds of harms they believe their children experienced. If the number on a parent’s ticket came up, they’d win one of 15 public seats to see that jury with their own eyes. Perhaps more importantly, they’d see the man many of them blame for their children’s deaths: Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who was set to testify that day.
The crowd waiting for those few coveted wooden seats included mothers like Mary Rodee and Lori Schott, just two of numerous parent advocates that traveled to watch a landmark social media case whose arguments conclude today. While this particular case focuses on the allegedly addictive design of Instagram and YouTube, parents were brought there by a much wider range of issues, after their children died by suicide, choking challenges, and accidental overdoses they believe were facilitated or exacerbated by online platforms. Some parents in attendance had filed their own suits against the companies. More are scheduled to face trial later this year.
A court staffer pulled a number that matched a ticket in the crowd, and the mood turned jubilant. Over days of this ritual, the reactions were similar: One mother gasped. Another danced down the hallway to collect her badge. Several times, the crowd of parents cheered when one of their numbers was called, until the court staff told them they needed to refrain.
Then, without warning, Zuckerberg marched through the crowd. He was a floating head behind a burly entourage, his face neutral and focused. The room fell to a hush with the slow realization of who had walked by. Within seconds, he had turned the corner toward the courtroom, and everyone began to chatter again.
Rodee, whose son Riley Basford died by suicide at age 15 after she says he was targeted for sextortion over Facebook, later recalled spotting Zuckerberg thanks to his unmistakable shock of curly reddish hair. “One thing that pisses me off about him is the curly hair,” Rodee told me. “Riley’s curly hair was so fricking cute. And then I want to shave his curly hair because he doesn’t fricking deserve it.”
Over the past several weeks, a Los Angeles jury has heard arguments in a social media case brought by a now 20-year-old woman going by K.G.M., or Kaley. She testified that the allegedly addictive design of the platforms had her using social media “all day long,” eventually contributing to suicidal thoughts and body image issues.
Meta and Google are defending themselves against claims that their products were negligently designed to hook users like Kaley and led to mental health issues. They have countered that it’s in their interest to create positive experiences for users, and other circumstances in Kaley’s life drove her mental health struggles, for which their platforms offered an outlet. (Snap and TikTok were also defendants, but settled their cases before trial.) It’s the first of several “bellwether” cases that could determine how thousands of similar suits are handled, with not only money but the companies’ long-held business models at stake.
Jury deliberations are expected to begin Friday, and it’s not known how long they’ll last. They’re tasked with determining whether each company was negligent in its product designs, and if they were a proximate cause of Kaley’s mental health struggles. Should they find in Kaley’s favor, they will also deliberate on damages. While the direct outcome of a win for Kaley would be monetary, Matthew Bergman, founding attorney of the Social Media Victims Law Center who has represented her, said it’s the “raison d’être” of the broader set of cases to make it so financially burdensome on companies that they “internalize the cost of safety and make it more expensive for Meta and YouTube to continue designing and operating and profiting from dangerous products than safe products.”
Left, Lori Schott holds a picture of her daughter Annalee who died by suicide after consuming social media content on depression, anxiety and suicide. Right, Amy Neville holds a picture of her son Alexander, who died at 14 from fentanyl purchased through social media. Photo: Jill Connelly / Getty Images
Parent advocates like Rodee and Schott know that there’s no guarantee of a win against the social media companies. No matter the outcome in LA County Superior Court, they are hoping to win in the court of public opinion. Over the first days of the trial, they told their children’s stories over and over outside of the courthouse to reporters and even to the lead plaintiff attorney in the case, Mark Lanier, as he left the building. “We need the awareness. We need public pressure on our politicians to say, can we try and save all of these American children?” said Annie McGrath, whose son Griffin — or Bubba — died at age 13 after attempting a choking challenge he allegedly learned from a YouTube video.
... continue reading