More than 40 families are intensifying pressure on Snap Inc., the parent company of Snapchat, demanding significant safety changes to the social media platform following the deaths of their children. The families allege that Snapchat facilitated access to dangerous substances, enabled online bullying, and exposed their children to sexual exploitation. A protest held Thursday at Snap Inc.’s headquarters in Santa Monica saw demonstrators blocking traffic and painting the names of over 100 children lost to social media harms onto the street.
The core of the families’ concerns centers on Snapchat’s design and features, which they believe contribute to addiction and harmful interactions. They are calling for a sweeping overhaul, including the removal of “addictive features,” defaulting privacy settings to the most restrictive levels for minors, eliminating features that connect young users with adults, disabling AI-powered chat companions, implementing robust age assurance mechanisms, and halting algorithms that promote harmful content, drugs, and child sexual abuse material.
Amy Neville, whose 14-year-old son Alexander died in 2020 after obtaining a counterfeit opioid pill through Snapchat, shared her story. “When he was 14 years old, This proves my belief that he was connected with a drug dealer on Snapchat that ultimately talked him into trying some things that maybe he hadn’t intended to try,” Neville told City News Service. She found her son unconscious and he later died. The pill Alexander believed to be oxycontin was, in fact, fentanyl – a synthetic opioid significantly more potent than morphine, where even a small amount can be fatal.
Neville described her son as a bright and adventurous child with a passion for learning. “He was only 14 when he died, so he’s still very much a little boy,” she said. She is currently involved in a lawsuit against Snap Inc., and is actively sharing her experience with students and parents across the country to raise awareness about the dangers of social media. “I actually just received an award for my work last week, which is weird to say,” Neville said. “I would trade everything … to have my kid back.”
The tragedy experienced by Neville’s family is not isolated. Todd Minor Sr. Lost his 12-year-old son, Matthew, in 2019 as a result of participating in a dangerous TikTok challenge. Minor stated, “We honor those that we have lost today by standing boldly in front of Snap Inc. To speak our truth, which is not easy still. We push through united in our incredible pain and drive for change… So this does not happen to another young person.”
The families’ actions coincide with a landmark civil trial underway in Los Angeles County Superior Court. This lawsuit challenges Meta and YouTube for allegedly promoting addictive products. While TikTok and Snap settled for undisclosed sums to avoid trial, the case highlights the growing legal scrutiny faced by social media companies regarding their impact on user well-being. The legal landscape is further complicated by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 law that generally shields internet platforms from liability for content posted by their users, and First Amendment protections for speech.
Snap Inc. Did not immediately respond to requests for comment regarding the protest or the families’ demands. However, the company has previously stated it has taken steps to address drug-related content on its platform, claiming to have removed over 2.4 million pieces of such content and disabled 516,000 related accounts in the past year. Snap also says it blocks searches for drug-related terms and redirects users to resources about the dangers of drug use.
The families’ concerns echo a broader debate about the responsibility of social media platforms to protect their users, particularly young people. The current legal framework, designed in the early days of the internet, is increasingly seen as inadequate to address the complex challenges posed by modern social media. The ongoing lawsuits and public pressure campaigns suggest a potential shift towards greater accountability for these companies, though the path forward remains uncertain. Neville expressed skepticism about meaningful change without legislative intervention or legal accountability, stating, “Until legislation or some sort of legal accountability happens, I’m sure it’s going to remain the same because they’re making oodles and oodles of money.”
The protest and the accompanying legal battles represent a significant challenge to Snap Inc. And the wider social media industry, forcing a reckoning with the potential harms associated with their platforms and the need for more effective safety measures.
