Scrolling 2 Death

What really happens inside one of the most powerful companies in the world?

This week, we sit down with Brian Boland, a former senior leader at Facebook (pre-Meta), who spent more than a decade helping build and scale Facebook and Instagram's advertising systems — and later testified in court about what he saw.

Brian was in the courtroom for nearly five hours. In this candid conversation, he pulls back the curtain on:
What it feels like to testify under oath against your former company
How Meta’s internal culture shifted after whistleblowers like Frances Haugen spoke out
The reality of Mark Zuckerberg’s power inside the company — and why the board can’t remove him
How algorithms are built, tested, and optimized — and why even engineers don’t fully understand their long-term impacts
Whether Meta is truly incentivized to limit teen usage
The truth about ad revenue from minors
How accurate age-estimation technology really is — and why that matters
What whistleblowing actually costs the people who do it

Brian doesn’t call for the end of social media. In fact, he believes these platforms could be built to strengthen communities. But he’s clear: the current incentives — profit, growth, daily active users — drive decisions that put engagement above safety.

He also shares what he told executives, including Mark Zuckerberg, before he left — and the response he received.

If you’ve ever wondered:
Are these platforms intentionally habit-forming?
Do they really know how young users are?
Could they reduce harm if they wanted to?
Why don’t more insiders speak out?

This episode is essential listening.

It’s a rare, inside look at how power, profit, algorithms, and accountability collide — and what it might actually take to force change.

The Heat is On...Big Tech on Trial is an investigative mini-series by Scrolling 2 Death, in partnership with Heat Initiative.

Video Editing expertly provided by Jacob Meade.

Research mentioned in the episode: Social media platforms generate billions of dollars in revenue from U.S. youth: Findings from a simulated revenue model (Raffoul article)

This week, we’re joined by Meta whistleblower Brian Boland, who appeared as a witness in this trial, and law student Christine Almadjian, who has spent hours inside the courtroom watching this case unfold. Christine is also a legislative consultant with END OSEAC.

Thousands of families, school districts, and dozens of states have filed consolidated lawsuits against TikTok, YouTube, Meta, and Snap Inc., alleging their platforms were deliberately designed to addict and harm children. Some are calling this “the tobacco trial of our generation.”

The first case centers on Kaley — a child like yours and mine — facing the most powerful companies in the world.

This week, YouTube’s VP of Engineering defended the algorithm as internal documents revealed research linking excessive use to addiction, sleep disruption, anxiety, depression, and body image issues — along with features like autoplay designed to increase watch time. We heard testimony that kids using YouTube while logged out are treated like adults, with no safety features enabled.

A data expert challenged Meta and YouTube’s reported ad revenue from minors, citing “significant errors and contradictions,” followed by testimony from Kaley's therapist.

Then Kaley took the stand.

She described creating multiple accounts to like her own videos and posts, sneaking her phone at night, spending up to 16 hours a day on Instagram, feeling panic without her device — and still, at 20 years old, struggling to stop. When asked whether she had addiction, anxiety, depression, or body dysmorphia before social media, her answer was simple: no.

Meta and YouTube pushed back hard, pointing to family conflict and school bullying. In just a few weeks, the jury will decide if social media was a subsantial factor in her mental heath struggles.

This case isn’t just about one family. It’s about millions of kids — and what happens next affects all of us.

The Heat is On...Big Tech on Trial is an investigative mini-series by Scrolling 2 Death, in partnership with Heat Initiative.

Video Editing expertly provided by Jacob Meade.

This week on The Heat is On…Big Tech on Trial, the spotlight was on Mark Zuckerberg — but it didn’t stay there for long.

Nicki Petrossi and Sarah Gardner take you inside a dramatic week in court as Zuckerberg faced questioning about youth safety, platform design, and internal company practices — followed by testimony from a former insider whose statements directly conflicted with his.

In this episode:
The most revealing exchanges from Zuckerberg’s time on the stand
The key claims he made — and what evidence challenged them
A whistleblower’s testimony that told a very different story about how platforms operate
Emotional reactions from parents watching it unfold in real time
Why legal observers say this week could shift momentum in the trial
A new Annual Report by Bark connecting Kaley's harm to children today

Millions are watching because what happens here will reshape accountability for the most powerful tech companies in the world.
This isn’t just a trial. It’s a turning point.

Thank you to our special guest, Titania Jordan of Bark Technologies. Here's their 2025 Annual Report, referenced in the episode.

The Heat is On...Big Tech on Trial is an investigative mini-series by Scrolling 2 Death, in partnership with Heat Initiative.

Video Editing expertly provided by Jacob Meade.

Week 3 marks a turning point inside the courtroom: opening statements begin, the first witnesses take the stand, and the stakes become unmistakably real. Hosts Nicki Petrossi and Sarah Gardner (of Heat Initiative) bring you inside the proceedings as plaintiffs and defense lay out competing narratives about what happened to Kaley—and what responsibility tech giants bear.

Plaintiff attorney Mark Lanier delivers what attendees call a “masterclass” opening, previewing internal records from YouTube and Meta suggesting early-age targeting and engineering for addiction. Defense attorney Paul Schmidt counters with a starkly different claim: that social platforms can benefit vulnerable teens and that responsibility lies elsewhere - on parents. YouTube counsel Louis Lee insists repeatedly: YouTube is not social media.

The first expert witness, addiction psychiatrist Dr. Anna Lembke of Stanford University, author of Dopamine Nation, walks jurors through the neuroscience of compulsive use—arguing that platform design features can function like addictive stimuli, especially for adolescents. Cross-examinations grow tense as attorneys challenge her comparisons and conclusions.

Midweek brings the highly anticipated testimony of Adam Mosseri, head of Instagram, questioned about past statements on social media addiction, teen safety, and whether growth incentives conflict with child protection. Outside the courthouse, grieving parents—including featured guest John DeMay—camp overnight for seats, hold direct actions targeting Snapchat, and remind the world what this trial is really about: children.

You’ll hear:
Real-time courthouse reflections
Parent voices from the steps outside
Key courtroom exchanges that could shape the verdict
Legal context explaining what jurors must decide

Next week’s witnesses raise the stakes even higher, with expected testimony from Mark Zuckerberg and Neal Mohan.

Because this isn’t just a trial. It’s a reckoning. And we’re translating every moment that matters for families everywhere.

This bonus episode of The Heat is On… Big Tech on Trial slows down to hold space for the weight of this moment.

Nicki Petrossi and Sarah Gardner are joined by Brandy and Toney Roberts, parents of 14-year-old Englyn Roberts, whose life was cut short after being exposed to harmful content on Instagram and other social media platforms. What unfolds is not just a conversation about Meta’s technology—but about grief, truth, and what it means to refuse indifference.

The Roberts family shares how Instagram’s algorithms repeatedly recommended suicide-related content to their daughter, how duplicate videos remained online long after being reported, and how easily this material continues to circulate today. Sarah breaks down the technical reality: the tools to prevent and remove this content exist—and always have.

Interwoven with these devastating realities are moments of grounding, connection, and meaning: reflections on community among bereaved parents, a courthouse vigil outside the Los Angeles trial, and the belief that love—never indifference—is what drives this fight.

This episode is raw. It is painful. And it is essential.

As the courtroom doors finally open, this conversation captures what’s truly on trial: corporate choices, accountability, and the lives of children.

Listener discretion advised.