On the sixth anniversary of a day that forever changed their lives, two grieving American mothers stood in Washington, D.C. this week, honoring not just their own sons, but hundreds of other children claimed by preventable harms linked to social media platforms. For Amy Neville and Kristin Bride, the shared tragedy that bonded them as soulmates has become the foundation of a national movement demanding sweeping accountability for tech companies and stronger protections for young users online.
June 23, 2020, marked the loss of both Neville’s 14-year-old son Alexander and Bride’s 16-year-old son Carson. The two teenagers lived 1,000 miles apart and never met, but their deaths were both rooted in dangerous interactions on social media. Alexander, a bright, entrepreneurial teen with a memorable laugh, was connected to a drug dealer through Snapchat who sold him the fatal pill that killed him. Carson, a warm, funny teenager who loved connecting with others, died by suicide at 16 after experiencing relentless, unmoderated cyberbullying on major platforms.
This Tuesday, the two boys were remembered alongside 270 other children and young people who have died from social media-related harms during a remembrance event in the nation’s capital. The date of their shared loss has been formally recognized by the U.S. Senate as Social Media Harms Victims Remembrance Day, a milestone that reflects growing public momentum around an issue long sidelined by federal policymakers.
When Bride first joined advocacy work after her son’s death, she said she felt completely isolated in her grief and anger. Today, the grassroots online child safety movement has expanded dramatically, with hundreds of other bereaved parents joining the push for tighter regulation and legal accountability. That momentum has already shifted the landscape: this year saw a series of landmark jury verdicts against major tech firms that have cleared a path for future legal action, even as comprehensive federal reform remains stalled.
Three jury decisions — two against Meta Platforms and one against Google parent Alphabet — have emerged as a turning point for the movement. For decades, Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act has shielded tech companies from legal liability for content posted by third-party users, creating a near-impenetrable barrier to accountability for child harm. Modern lawsuits, however, have avoided this protection by focusing not on user-posted content, but on the deliberate design choices platforms make to maximize engagement at the cost of child safety.
Court evidence from these recent trials has pulled back the curtain on internal industry practices, including internal communications from tech employees comparing their addictive products to cigarettes and casino games. Matthew Bergman, head of the Social Media Victims Law Center, which represents more than 1,000 plaintiffs in cases against social media companies, called the fact that these cases are even proceeding to trial a watershed moment. “It is still a hurdle, but it is no longer a barrier,” Bergman said of Section 230.
Global momentum for reform has also grown, with a growing list of countries including Australia, the United Kingdom, Turkey, and Indonesia implementing full or partial bans on social media use for children under 16. While the U.S. has not moved toward such sweeping restrictions, congressional pressure for regulation is building again after years of inaction. This week, House lawmakers unveiled a bipartisan draft bill, the Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act, which draws from portions of the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) that passed the Senate in 2024. But the proposal has already drawn criticism from advocates, who say it was stripped of its most critical provision: a legal “duty of care” that would require platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent harm to minors.
“Without a duty of care, Big Tech companies will maintain the status quo of putting profit before the safety of our children,” Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said in a statement criticizing the watered-down draft.
Bride, who has outlined a three-pronged strategy of legislation, litigation, and public education, said the movement can continue to advance even if congressional reform stalls. “When one stalls, like legislation, then we have the trials and we have litigation,” she explained. “So we keep pressing forward. We’re not going to give up.”
Major tech firms have responded to growing pressure by rolling out incremental safety updates in recent years. Snap, the parent company of Snapchat, said in a statement that it “works continuously to strengthen safety protections across its platform.” Platforms have introduced features like default private teen accounts, restrictions on stranger messaging, age-gated content limits, and dedicated parental controls. Instagram now restricts teen accounts to PG-13-rated content, while YouTube offers supervised accounts for preteens who have outgrown its dedicated kids app. But advocates argue these incremental changes do not address the core problem: platforms’ fundamental business model prioritizes maximum user engagement over child safety.
“There have been some improvements. A 13-year-old child is not by default provided with an open account for adult predators to prey upon. So, you know, there are baby steps, but there are steps in the right direction. We just need more of them,” Bergman said.
On Capitol Hill, a growing bipartisan coalition of senators is calling for urgent, sweeping action, with some even calling for a full repeal of Section 230. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., slammed congressional inaction, arguing that campaign contributions and millions of dollars in annual lobbying from the tech industry have blocked reform. “It’s the same reason that the companies want the kids online, want their privacy destroyed, want all their information — it’s money,” Hawley said.
The Senate Judiciary Committee has amplified this pressure by inviting the CEOs of Meta, Alphabet, TikTok, and Snap to testify under oath at an upcoming hearing, framed with a provocative question: “Is This Social Media’s Big Tobacco Moment?” The hearing reflects a growing belief among policymakers and advocates that public awareness of social media’s harms to children has reached a tipping point.
For Neville and Bride, who have attended every hearing and advocacy event for years, the fight remains personal and urgent. Both remain optimistic that meaningful change is coming, even as they acknowledge the long road ahead. Neville, who has dedicated her life to the movement, said the work is non-negotiable. “Every morning I wake up, lives are on the line. If we’re not talking about these things, if we’re not doing something about it, lives are on line,” she said. “And that’s probably not good for my nervous system, but that’s the state that I’ll live in until I’ll probably die on this hill.”