Meta & Children's Online SafetyChat: is [Adam Mosseri] fucking nuts?
Raw text
Case 4:22-md-03047-YGR Document 2887-24 Filed 03/27/26 Page 1 of 5 AMENDED Exhibit 354 PLAINTIFFS' OMNIBUS OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Case No.: 4:22-md-03047-YGR MDL No. 3047 In Re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation Case 4:22-md-03047-YGR Document 2887-24 Filed 03/27/26 ΜΕΤΑ3047MDL-020-00128524 Page 2 of 5 Metadata All Custodians Crenshaw_Liza SEMANTIC All Paths /Crenshaw Liz ook data file/Inbox;/Crenshaw_Liza/Top of Personal SEMANTIC Folders/Inbox; /Top of Personal Folders/Inbox Confidentiality HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL (COMPETITOR) SEMANTIC Date Sent 11/02/2021 6:19 pm SEMANTIC From SEMANTIC Primary Date 11/02/2021 6:19 pm To >; Liza Crenshaw DOC TYP E ALIAS SEMANTIC EXHIBIT Liza Crenshaw Social Media MDL 3047 Crenshaw 0052 Case 4:22-md-03047-YGR Document 2887-24 Filed 03/27/26 Page 3 of 5 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Liza Crenshaw [/O=THEFACEBOOK/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=2E80C09EC6F9459BB0281ED6DC601D4A 11/2/2021 6:19:57 PM Liza Crenshaw Message summary [{"otherUserFbId":100024423100577,"threadFbld":null}] Attachments: 249317974_250554210276399_5368562044694284371_n.png Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 09:46:04 PDT): >Interested in what u think about this (11/02/2021 09:46:18 PDT): >LOVE THIS (11/02/2021 09:46:28 PDT): >wbu? (11/02/2021 09:46:40 PDT): >realistically it won't stop the racists Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 09:46:42 PDT): >I love the intent the language was kindaaaa weird Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 09:46:54 PDT): >like patronizing, so we're trying to update a bit (11/02/2021 09:47:00 PDT): >and will land badly if we're still not taking enough action (11/02/2021 09:47:29 PDT): >yes would def love us to be able to review the copy Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 09:51:16 PDT): >yeah...ima take a closer look at this today and work on reactive etc (11/02/2021 10:07:26 PDT): >another qq i saw on the agenda yesterday that teen defaults are down for 11 nov what does that refer to? Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 10:58:52 PDT): >same thing i sent the photo of last week!! Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 10:58:54 PDT): >lemme find (11/02/2021 10:58:59 PDT): >gah sorry Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 10:59:04 PDT): >its ok lots of tings (11/02/2021 10:59:09 PDT): >in IG pals chat? i can look if so Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 10:59:17 PDT): >yes! Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 10:59:17 PDT): shared: 249317974_250554210276399_5368562044694284371_n.png (11/02/2021 10:59:25 PDT): >oh fuck yeh sorry! Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 10:59:45 PDT): >i did ask on our pals call though what ppls preference was on announcing and when (11/02/2021 11:00:09 PDT): >hmmm prob when we announce take a break? HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL (COMPETITOR) META3047MDL-020-00128524 Case 4:22-md-03047-YGR Document 2887-24 Filed 03/27/26 (11/02/2021 11:00:15 PDT): >although these are pretty minor right Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:00:23 PDT): >very minor Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:00:30 PDT): >we were thinking about take a break but theyre pretty privacy focused Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:00:43 PDT): >feels kinda different Page 4 of 5 (11/02/2021 11:01:00 PDT): >honestly these are like hygiene i wouldnt even announce, would just reference in our normal talking points Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:01:52 PDT): >yeah we're going to create a little infographic/timeline of youth safety efforts that we were thinking we'd include them in (11/02/2021 11:01:57 PDT): >oh nice Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:02:30 PDT): >and perhaps just give small heads up to a few reporters but nothing major Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:02:33 PDT): >to ur point (11/02/2021 11:04:57 PDT): >id be slightly nervous about alerting reporters to the fact that these privacy settings were defaulted off before (11/02/2021 11:05:37 PDT): >also it occurred to me the other day we say 'there are lots of valid reasons why young people woudl have public accounts', and cite the example of creators/young entrepreneurs Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:05:46 PDT): >yes we do (11/02/2021 11:05:49 PDT): >but wouldnt they have a creator/biz accounts, which are automatically public? Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:10:10 PDT): >yes Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:10:14 PDT): >but still valid Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:10:22 PDT): >i think??? (11/02/2021 11:11:04 PDT): >it just made me think, then what example are we actually thinking of when we say there are lots of valid reason why young people would want/need a public PERSONAL account Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:12:00 PDT): >well some athletes and such still use personal accounts (11/02/2021 11:12:13 PDT): >i guess (11/02/2021 11:12:33 PDT): >just feels like we're then making the rules for those exceptions, versus deciding to err on safety and just say under 16 accounts on IG are private (11/02/2021 11:13:13 PDT): >the risk could then be if u16s then switched to professional accounts so they could have public accounts but im not sure how big a risk that is Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:14:02 PDT): >i dont disagree Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:14:08 PDT): >but you know how contentious this change alone was (11/02/2021 11:16:54 PDT): >it's absolutely mad that it was so contentious HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL (COMPETITOR) META3047MDL-020-00128525 Case 4:22-md-03047-YGR Document 2887-24 Filed 03/27/26 (11/02/2021 11:17:01 PDT): >with adam or others too? Page 5 of 5 (11/02/2021 11:17:17 PDT): >we will never get out of this mess if he/we're not just prepared to ERR ON THE SIDE OF SAFETY (11/02/2021 11:17:18 PDT): >jesus (11/02/2021 11:17:39 PDT): >i know i'm advocating for NOT letting them switch back but i don't get why defaulting into private was contentious, given they CAN just switch back! Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:17:45 PDT): >it was mostly adam for sure Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:17:49 PDT): >it was a huge growth hit Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:17:55 PDT): >like shockingly so (11/02/2021 11:18:25 PDT): >would he want any tom dick or harry being able to see all his kids' content, follow them etc? is he fucking nuts? (11/02/2021 11:18:41 PDT): >interesting (11/02/2021 11:18:54 PDT): >well not doing it for that reason would have been unforgivable so im glad we did! Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:19:52 PDT): >i mean we did NOT do it for a very long period of time because of that Elizabeth Crenshaw (11/02/2021 11:19:57 PDT): >i agree though HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL (COMPETITOR) META3047MDL-020-00128526