Ok so isn’t the issue at hand whether the sites are to blame?

let’s break this down so I can answer you in what I think is an honest way:

1. Are the sites legally responsible for the content they host, generally speaking and/or in this context of radicalization and such subsequent results as these?

and

2. Do these sites bear any social/moral responsibility to moderate their more extreme content in good faith to try to prevent this sort of result?

and

3. Is there an overlap of 1 and 2?

1 - this is for a court to decide. I’m not familiar enough with the very specifics of case law or with the suits being brought to know exactly what is being alleged, etc. I can’t opine on this other that to say that, from what I do know, it’s unlikely that a court would hold these sites legally responsible.

2 - I fully believe that, yes, sites like these, massive, general-use public sites have a social and moral responsibility to keep their platforms safe. How and what that means is a matter for much debate, and I’m sure people here will do just that.

3 - is there overlap? again, legally, I’m not sure, but there might be, and in the near future, there might be much more. also, should there be more? another subject for debate.