Statement on Landmark Social Media Addiction Trials

(Washington, D.C.) — Parents for Safe Online Spaces (ParentsSOS), a coalition of 20 families who have lost children due to online harms, issued the following statement after the opening arguments in the landmark social media addiction trials in Los Angeles and the New Mexico trial against Meta:

“We survivor parents who have experienced the unthinkable – the death of a child as a result of online harms – watched when Mark Zuckerberg was forced to offer an apology to us two years ago at the Senate hearing on Capitol Hill. He offered hollow words, saying, ‘I’m sorry for everything you’ve all gone through. It’s terrible. No one should have to go through the things that your families have suffered.’

“Had he meant those words, there would have been meaningful change on Meta platforms in the two years since the apology. Yet today, Meta is on trial for the online harms that Zuckerberg’s products have inflicted and continue to inflict on youth and children. What sickens us the most is that our policymakers, those we elected into office to fight for our communities, could have played a more pivotal role in holding Meta accountable. 

“Congress has been considering the bipartisan, safety-by-design legislation, the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), for years. The bill would impose a duty of care on online platforms to proactively mitigate the most serious online harms. These trials underscore why social media companies should be held liable for designing their platforms to exploit users’ attention, no matter their age. 

“We believe there will be a reckoning for Mark Zuckerberg and his empty apology two years ago, and the courts will deliver some small measure of justice for families whose lives have been destroyed by Big Tech companies. We also hope that our policymakers are taking note this time and realize that these trials might not be needed had they already passed KOSA into law. It’s time for Congress to stand with American families and pass KOSA with a duty of care and no preemption of state laws.” ■