this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2026
290 points (99.3% liked)

politics

29393 readers
28 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

https://apnews.com/article/meta-tiktok-snap-discord-zuckerberg-testify-senate-00754a6bea92aaad62585ed55f219932

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.

top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] thethrilloftime69@feddit.online 46 points 1 month ago

They intentionally addict adults idk why children would be immune to that.

Its a trial in the US so the verdict will be "you are guilty unless you give Trump some gold bars" and then Zucc will give Trump some gold bars and continue as usual.

[–] RejZoR@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

These hearings are totally stupid waste of time. You don't ask corporations "How do you feel?". You do your own investigations and you tell them what bullshit they need to stop doing.

[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Absolutely not. First, you depose them. Under oath. And then you investigate. If you investigate first without deposing them, you have to have evidence so bulletproof they can't come up with some story justifying it or explaining it away. If you depose them first, they already had to choose a story to go with and you just prove they lied. The more you depose them, the easier that is.

This is how pretty much all civil lawsuits go as well.

[–] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

How many billionaires or Epstein class have faced consequences with this "method"?

[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

How many times was this method used on them? The method is solid. The people in power refusing to genuinely prosecute the Epstein class is a different problem.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"We did it by accident, but by the time we realized what was happening, it was making us billions of dollars and so we just kept doing it".

[–] Puddinghelmet@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

by accident? 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. ...

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I'm talking about the beginning. Facebook was founded as a college only MySpace and exploded after that. It wasn't until about 2007 that they went crazy with the news and algorithm manipulation stuff, one might even say they hadn't discovered and perfected it yet. That's what I'm referring to.

[–] DickFiasco@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Spoiler alert: Zuck is given a stern talking-to and told to make his platform less addicting. He does nothing, is not punished in any meaningful way, and we grudgingly accept the new reality.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Likely. Or they may fine him a couple billion and he'll delight in that as just being the (cheap) cost of business.

[–] osanna@thebrainbin.org 13 points 1 month ago

fine them eleventy bajillion dollars

[–] Embargo@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 month ago

Trump's America hangs on the success of like five companies so although we all know they're guilty, they'll keep rolling on. It's the same reason nobody is being persecuted for being in the Epstein files... The dow will drop below 5 thousand or whatever the fuck.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago

We are hearing testimony about harm to children from a guy who attended the wildest parties on Epstein Island?

[–] PagPag@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

“They were just begging for it.”

[–] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

More robot zuck memes incoming

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 5 points 1 month ago

"Soulless husk gaslights court with AI generated essay on the merits of addiction"

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I guess we've just decided that it's okay to addict and harm adults.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

Tobacco companies have been doing it for 100 years supported by Congress and Senate.

[–] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Zuckerbot will have to get its algorithm running right this time

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago

It's already running EXACTLY like he wants it to: optimized for engagement, rage, fear, and addictiveness for maximum profitability.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Let's say they did. What laws would that break?

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Outside of the "deliberately harming children" part?

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

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?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Puddinghelmet@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

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...

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 1 points 1 month ago

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"?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

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.

[–] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

At this point I'm convinced they only do trials to demonstrate that they (billionaires) can get away with anything.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 2 points 1 month ago

It should be banned for kids. 18+ so that nobody gets in trouble and all is good in the world. I don't plan on getting my kids any internet capable device until they are old enough to know right from wrong at 18. There's no need for them to have access other than for school work thru their student laptops. All student laptops should probably have Linux.

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

I remember a time when it was Facebook's policy that you had to be over 18 to have an account, but they did absolutely nothing to enforce it and kids were on it anyway with fake birth dates