Who exactly is to blame?

September 2025

Here we go again! Another Judicial Hearing in the US regarding the unethical practices of Meta. This time (because you might get it confused with the previous 5), we are witness to the testimony of two former Meta employees who ripped back the curtain on exactly what Meta thinks of our children.

On September 9, Former Meta researchers, Jason Sattizahn and Cayce Savage came forward to provide 'whistleblower evidence' to the Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law. This hearing was the most damning in a long list of inquiries faced by Zuckerberg over the past decade, and one which it might be tough to recover from.

However, Zuckerberg has been here many times before!

Sattizahn and Savage went into explicit detail regarding their experiences in the 6 and 4 years of their employment respectively. Most concerning was the manner in which Meta was acting regarding research into the harms being faced by children using Meta's VR headsets, especially within Horizon Worlds.

During nearly two hours of evidence, I found myself yelling "I told you so!" at the screen time and time again, jumping up and down in anger and frustration, as though I was watching an AFL final!

My blood was boiling over the responses and comments from Senators who seemed surprised to hear what myself and other online safety advocates have been shouting for years. The information provided by Sattizahn and Savage perfectly reflected the evidence and statements I have been screaming for ages.

"Meta are fully aware children are being harmed in VR and all Meta products." - Cayce Savage.

This statement by Savage is in direct contradiction to the one made by Antigone Davis, Meta Vice President and Global Head of Safety to the Joint Select Committee on Social Media and Australian Society in June of 2024; "I don't think Social Media (Facebook & Instagram) does harm to our children!"

I listened to that comment by Davis live when she made it, and my anger then was close to overwhelming. I made it quite clear at the time I believed her claim to be either a deliberate lie or a reflection of utter delusion.

I have no hesitation in letting my supporters know which of these women I believe. A former employee who made the decision to come forward after failing to shift a culture of neglect at Meta, or an immoral coward who is prepared to compromise her values to appease an equally immoral boss.

"Meta is aggressively ambivalent to people!" - Jason Sattizahn

Sattizahn was employed at Meta for 6 years, working exclusively in user research and safety, tasked with understanding users and their needs. He used this research to try and make Meta products safer.

His statement of ambivalence by Meta perfectly reflects what it is like for people such as I who work in the field of online juvenile harm. It reflects a realisation that I am forever destined to fight a losing battle, and I also believe it sums up Zuckerberg perfectly.

Meta has such positive feelings and encouragement for whom they target to use their products. They are all about forcing user engagement and interaction, whilst simultaneously harvesting them of data. Yet when it comes to the protection of those users, especially our children, they are compelled to negligence, which manifests in aggressive, hostile or avoidant behaviours.

This is the modus operandi of Meta and all Big Tech environments, especially Social Media networks, and it has been my world for fifteen years. They are all about drawing users in, but abandon them when they are exposed to harm and ignore them when they request help.

Sattizahn gave clear and precise evidence that Meta deliberately deleted evidence of children being exposed to harm on Meta products and failed to report such harm to investigative or judicial bodies. He and others in research were told not to investigate harms against children, and after the whistleblower testimony of Francis Haugen in 2021, all research was monitored by a "legal surveillance" team.

So exactly who is going to act and when?

The United States Congress has refused to keep up with technology. Bureaucracy, corruption and unethical practices have been the rule, and Big Tech have taken advantage of a political system which has benefited them and failed the victims of online harm.

For a number of years, almost all other governments around the world have stepped up to address the harms created by Big Tech, especially those being experienced by children. They have had enough of being ignored by Big Tech and they are finally acting. Australia's eSafety Commissioner is leading the world in this regard.

Sadly, the Government which needs to act the most, refuses to do so! In fact, instead of introducing legislation to address online harm, the US Congress introduced laws to protect Big Tech from civil and criminal litigation. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has allowed online environments to flourish without regulation for almost 20 years, and Big Tech giants have taken full advantage of the protection that law provides.

The US Government has created a safe harbour, a sanctuary for profit driven criminals and immoral cowards. They have empowered the unethical design of the internet and it is society which has suffered as a result of the free reign for profit which has been created. So who in the US Government is going to have the courage and moral fortitude to act?

  • The 32 Senators who have invested in Meta financially (many pictured above) will not!

  • Another 28 Senators who have been paid directly by Meta via lobbyists are unlikely to put their wallets down and act.

  • Eleven of the 12 US Senators who grilled Antigone Davis at a Senate Hearing in 2021, are unlikely to act, because they had also received payments from Meta prior to that hearing!

  • A good number of US Senators are expected to significantly benefit financially from Meta's billion dollar data facility being built in Texas. So they will not act.

  • We only need to look at the front row of Trumps inauguration to see the influence Big Tech giants are having on the White House, with a combined trillion dollars worth of wealth patting The President on the back! So will Trump act? I think we all know the answer to that!

In this most recent Senate Hearing with Sattizahn and Savage and also during the Senate Hearing into Online Juvenile Harm in 2024, Senators Amy Klobuchar and Josh Hawley both suggested repealing Section 230, so Mark Zuckerberg could be sued by victims.

I do believe repealing S230 needs to happen, but with so many Senators on Zuckerbergs payroll, I doubt it will. If such a Bill is put forward by an ethical Senator, ultimately it will need to be signed off by the President. The chances of Trump signing such a Bill into law is extremely unlikely.

The next option could be to introduce a Bill which does not repeal S230, but amends it to restrict the free reign it provides for the lack of moderation or regulation of online environments. Only three US Senators (including Hawley) have attempted such action since 2019, and those Bills have gone nowhere!

As such, I hope you can understand my frustration and reluctant acceptance that Big Tech will continue to do what they do and children will continue to suffer and die because of the unethical design of the online world. I will continue to deal with victims who are abandoned by Social Media and gaming environments and the grief they face.

In the fifteen years I have been doing this, eleven children I have worked with have taken their own lives as a result of harm they experienced on Social Media. The youngest of those children was 12 years of age. These are the kids I know about!

With all of these kids, their decision to make such a terrible decision was not as much about what had happened to them, instead it was as a result of the fact they were ignored by Big Tech. The refusal to act on the harms Sattizahn and Savage were clearly identifying compounded these kids suffering and kept repeating their victimisation over and over again. It was unending and relentless.

At the end of the hearing, Senator (Chairperson) Marsha Blackburn stated she was going to "ring Mr Zuckerberg to get a response" to the claims made by Sattizahn and Savage and for him to "address" their testimony and evidence. As I heard that comment, I yelled at the screen "WHY?"

If Mark Zuckerberg is called before yet another Senate Hearing in order to address this latest list of allegations, I will see that as an embarrassment for the US Senate. It will be nothing less than a true reflection of how corrupt the system is in the US. How many chances are you going to give him to lie and deceive?

Instead of calling Meta, I would suggest Senator Blackburn call the Attorney General to make a criminal referral for Zuckerberg to be charged with Perjury, Misleading Congress or Making False Statements to Congress. This referral could be signed by all Senators present in this most recent hearing.

Any ethical Prosecutor who is not on Zuckerbergs payroll, would quite easily be able to trawl through the testimony of Sattizahn and Savage, as well as Sarah Wynn-Williams earlier this year, Arturo Bejar in 2023 and Frances Haugen in 2021, to find evidence of Zuckerberg and other Meta executives contravening judicial law. Perhaps it is a criminal conviction which might be the start of change!

Like a broken record, once again I say, Enough is Enough!

Pretty much everyone else on the planet is screaming out for change. There has been a global commitment by many governments around the world demanding Big Tech push toward the ethical and safety by design principals of their environments. Local laws and legislative responses are driving that desire and the voices of victims are getting louder and louder, to the point they are now globally deafening.

Education is getting better and better as teachers continue to develop ways to educate kids on the harms of the online world. Parents are becoming more aware and trying their best to minimise risk. Even kids themselves are waking up to being manipulated and changing how they are using the internet and devices.

It is time for the US Congress to act with true intent. For too long they have failed to do so and millions of victims have suffered as a result of their continued inaction. They have built a system which has been taken advantage of with legal immunity and people have died as a result.

They have blood on their hands.