Business
Uvalde school shooter was fueled by Instagram and 'Call of Duty,' L.A. lawsuit alleges
Tess Mata’s parents were once enthusiastic about social media. The 10-year-old from Uvalde, Texas, wanted to be TikTok famous. She used to dance, sing and imitate popular trends on her videos, with mom Veronica and dad Jerry keeping a watchful eye on her online habits.
But then Tess was gunned down at Robb Elementary School in 2022, one of 19 children and two teachers killed by a former student.
Since then, as details of the shooter’s personal life have become public, the Matas and a handful of other Uvalde families have come to believe that his exposure to gun content online and in video games led to the tragedy.
Jerry and Veronica Mata stand in front of the Spring Street Courthouse on July 17 in Los Angeles. After their daughter Tess was killed in the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, the couple are suing Meta, Activision and Daniel Defense in an attempt to challenge social media and video game marketing that they say urged the shooter to commit violence.
(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)
They are now suing three companies they allege profited off the violent fantasies that led to their children’s deaths. The defendants include the maker of “Call of Duty,” a first-person military shooter game where they say 18-year-old Salvador Ramos encountered a virtual version of a Daniel Defense-branded AR-15 he used in the attack. They are also suing Meta, alleging Ramos encountered ads for the gun that promoted violence on Instagram.
The Matas and three other families from Uvalde will travel more than 1,200 miles this week to confront the companies in L.A. County Superior Court, where they have filed claims for negligence, aiding and abetting and wrongful death.
“They glorify these weapons. They made it enticing for young kids to want to purchase these guns, and kids that young are so receptive to these types of things,” Veronica Mata told The Times.
Activision, the Santa Monica-based video game developer, has filed for dismissal, arguing that the 1st Amendment protects “Call of Duty” as a work of art. Meta has also fought to have the case tossed, pointing to well-established case law that shields social media platforms from liability for third-party content posted by users and advertisers.
Whether the case proceeds could be decided at a hearing Friday in downtown L.A.
Jerry Mata holds dog tag necklaces of his daughter Tess, one of 19 students killed at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, in 2022.
(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)
The families allege “Call of Duty,” one of the top-grossing video game franchises in the world, encouraged violence by catching Ramos in a repeated gameplay loop with real-world weapons. And they claim Instagram equipped him with the knowledge of how, when and where to buy the gun he used.
“To put a finer point on it: Defendants are chewing up alienated teenage boys and spitting out mass shooters,” the complaint claims, noting that the three most deadly K-12 school shootings in American history — Uvalde, Parkland and Sandy Hook — were all committed by young men who played “Call of Duty” and used an AR-15.
“Call of Duty is a simulation, not a game. It teaches players how to aim, reload, and fire accurately, while habituating the teenage nervous system to inflict repeated, graphic violence. And though the killing is virtual, the weapons are authentic,” the complaint alleges.
Ramos’ choice of the Daniel Defense AR-15 was intentional, the lawsuit said. The small weapons manufacturer has a market share of less than 1%, but a specific rail displayed on a popular “Call of Duty” gun made it easily identifiable to players online despite a lack of branding inside the game.
“It is the Defendants who gave Daniel Defense a direct line into children’s homes and heads, who wrote a playbook for how to peddle firearms while circumventing parents and the law, and who created a simulation with real-life weapons and applauded children for their proficiency at killing,” the complaint said.
Meta did not immediately respond to The Times’ request for comment, nor did Daniel Defense, another defendant in the lawsuit.
A photo of a weapon next to the truck that the Robb Elementary School shooter crashed before the shooting on May 24, 2022.
(Pete Luna / Uvlade Leader-News)
Courts have long rejected the idea that violent video games like “Call of Duty” are responsible for the actions of those who play them despite the moral panic surrounding the issue, and have also overturned efforts to restrict minors’ access to them.
Most modern “Call of Duty” games are rated for mature audiences over 17 by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, but are available to minors through online marketplaces that don’t meaningfully verify someone’s age before purchase.
“Any adolescent that wants to download Call of Duty can do that,” Josh Koskoff, a lawyer for the Uvalde families, told The Times.
A 2011 Supreme Court case, Brown vs. Entertainment Merchants Assn., struck down a 2005 California law that banned the sale of violent video games to minors. There was “no tradition in this country of specially restricting children’s access to depictions of violence. … Grimm’s Fairy Tales, for example, are grim indeed,” the late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the 7-2 majority opinion.
Activision has long defended its games as protected artistic expression despite criticism of its extreme violence, which sometimes involves players killing other combatants — almost never allowing civilian casualties — in combat simulations, sometimes in public arenas like airports and urban sprawls.
“Call of Duty tells complex stories that explore the real-world combat scenarios that soldiers face in modern warfare. There can be no doubt Call of Duty is expressive and fully protected by the First Amendment,” the company said in a court filing.
The families still mourning their children say challenging the institutions that failed to protect them has been an ongoing fight. The new case is another chapter which feels like taking on giants, Veronica Mata said.
A woman walks near “Call of Duty” publicity on Dec. 7, 2022, in New York City.
(VIEW press / Corbis via Getty Images)
The city of Uvalde approved in May a $2-million settlement for a flawed police response to the shooting, and a Texas appeals court Wednesday ordered the release of documents from the school board and county about the shooting, local news reported.
“We can step forward, and we can make that change and make them understand that what they’ve done and what they continue to do is not benefiting them or anybody else,” Mata said.
A bill that would have required insurers to offer coverage to homeowners who take steps to reduce wildfire risk on their property died in the Legislature.
The Senate Insurance Committee on Monday voted down the measure, SB 1076, one of the most ambitious bills spurred by the devastating January 2025 wildfires.
The vote came despite fire victims and others rallying at the state Capitol in support of the measure, authored by state Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez (D-Pasadena), whose district includes the Eaton fire zone.
The Insurance Coverage for Fire-Safe Homes Act originally would have required insurers to offer and renew coverage for any home that meets wildfire-safety standards adopted by the insurance commissioner starting Jan. 1, 2028.
It also threatened insurers with a five-year ban from the sale of home or auto insurance if they did not comply, though it allowed for exceptions.
However, faced with strong opposition from the insurance industry, Pérez had agreed to amend the bill so it would have established community-wide pilot projects across the state to better understand the most effective way to limit property and insurance losses from wildfires.
Insurers would have had to offer four years of coverage to homeowners in successful pilot projects.
Denni Ritter, a vice president of the American Property Casualty Insurance Assn., told the committee that her trade group opposed the bill.
“While we appreciate the intent behind those conversations, those concepts do not remove our opposition, because they retain the same core flaw — substituting underwriting judgment and solvency safeguards with a statutory mandate to accept risk,” she said.
In voting against the bill Sen. Laura Richardson, (D-San Pedro), said: “Last I heard, in the United States, we don’t require any company to do anything. That’s the difference between capitalism and communism, frankly.”
The remarks against the measure prompted committee Chair Sen. Steve Padilla, (D-Chula Vista), to chastise committee members in opposition.
“I’m a little perturbed, and I’m a little disappointed, because you have someone who is trying to work with industry, who is trying to get facts and data,” he said.
Monday’s vote was the fourth time a bill that would have required insurers to offer coverage to so-called “fire hardened” homes failed in the Legislature since 2020, according to an analysis by insurance committee staff.
Fire hardening includes measures such as cutting back brush, installing fire resistant roofs and closing eaves to resist fire embers.
Pérez’s legislation was thought to have a better chance of passage because it followed the most catastrophic wildfires in U.S. history, which damaged or destroyed more than 18,000 structures and killed 31 people.
The bill was co-sponsored by the Los Angeles advocacy group Consumer Watchdog and Every Fire Survivor’s Network, a community group founded in Altadena after the fires formerly called the Eaton Fire Survivors Network.
But it also had broad support from groups such as the California Apartment Association, the California Nurses Association and California Environmental Voters.
Leading up to the fires, many insurers, citing heightened fire risk, had dropped policyholders in fire-prone neighorhoods. That forced them onto the California FAIR Plan, the state’s insurer of last resort, which offers limited but costly policies.
A Times analysis found that that in the Palisades and Eaton fire zones, the FAIR Plan’s rolls from 2020 to 2024 nearly doubled from 14,272 to 28,440. Mandating coverage has been seen as a way of reducing FAIR Plan enrollment.
“I’m disappointed this bill died in committee. Fire survivors deserved better,” Pérez said in a statement .
Also failing Monday in the committee was SB 982, a bill authored by Sen. Scott Wiener, (D-San Francisco). It would have authorized California’s attorney general to sue fossil fuel companies to recover losses from climate-induced disasters. It was opposed by the oil and gas industry.
Passing the committee were two other Pérez bills. SB 877 requires insurers to provide more transparency in the claims process. SB 878 imposes a penalty on insurers who don’t make claims payments on time.
Another bill, SB 1301, authored by insurance commissioner candidate Sen. Ben Allen, (D-Pacific Palisades), also passed. It protects policyholders from unexplained and abrupt policy non-renewals.
Times Insider explains who we are and what we do, and delivers behind-the-scenes insights into how our journalism comes together.
Politicians in Washington and the reporters who cover them have an often adversarial relationship.
But on the last Saturday in April, they gather for an irreverent celebration of press freedom and the First Amendment at the Washington Hilton Hotel: The White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.
Hosted by the association, an organization that helps ensure access for media outlets covering the presidency, the dinner attracts Hollywood stars; politicians from both parties; and representatives of more than 100 networks, newspapers, magazines and wire services.
While The Times will have two reporters in the ballroom covering the event, the company no longer buys seats at the party, said Richard W. Stevenson, the Washington bureau chief. The decision goes back almost two decades; the last dinner The Times attended as an organization was in 2007.
“We made a judgment back then that the event had become too celebrity-focused and was undercutting our need to demonstrate to readers that we always seek to maintain a proper distance from the people we cover, many of whom attend as guests,” he said.
It’s a decision, he added, that “we have stuck by through both Republican and Democratic administrations, although we support the work of the White House Correspondents’ Association.”
Susan Wessling, The Times’s Standards editor, said the policy is a product of the organization’s desire to maintain editorial independence.
“We don’t want to leave readers with any questions about our independence and credibility by seeming to be overly friendly with people whose words and actions we need to report on,” she said.
The celebrity mentalist Oz Pearlman is headlining the evening, in lieu of the usual comedy set by the likes of Stephen Colbert and Hasan Minhaj, but all eyes will be on President Trump, who will make his first appearance at the dinner as president.
Mr. Trump has boycotted the event since 2011, when he was the butt of punchlines delivered by President Barack Obama and the talk show host Seth Meyers mocking his hair, his reality TV show and his preoccupation with the “birther” movement.
Last month, though, Mr. Trump, who has a contentious relationship with the media, announced his intention to attend this year’s dinner, where he will speak to a room full of the same reporters he often derides as “enemies of the people.”
Times reporters will be there to document the highs, the lows and the reactions in the room. A reporter for the Styles desk has also been assigned to cover the robust roster of after-parties around Washington.
Some off-duty reporters from The Times will also be present at this late-night circuit, though everyone remains cognizant of their roles, said Patrick Healy, The Times’s assistant managing editor for Standards and Trust.
“If they’re reporting, there’s a notebook or recorder out as usual,” he said. “If they’re not, they’re pros who know they’re always identifiable as Times journalists.”
For most of The Times’s reporters and editors, though, the evening will be experienced from home.
“The rest of us will be able to follow the coverage,” Mr. Stevenson said, “without having to don our tuxes or gowns.”
A former female staffer who worked for Beast Industries, the media venture behind the popular YouTube channel MrBeast, is suing the company, alleging she was sexually harassed and fired shortly after she returned from maternity leave.
The employee, Lorrayne Mavromatis, a Brazilian-born social media professional, alleges in a lawsuit she was subjected to sexual harassment by the company’s management and demoted after she complained about her treatment. She said she was urged to join a conference call while in labor and expected to work during her maternity leave in violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act, according to the federal complaint filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
“This clout-chasing complaint is built on deliberate misrepresentations and categorically false statements, and we have the receipts to prove it. There is extensive evidence — including Slack and WhatsApp messages, company documents, and witness testimony — that unequivocally refutes her claims. We will not submit to opportunistic lawyers looking to manufacture a payday from us,” Gaude Paez, a Beast Industries spokesperson, said in a statement.
Jimmy Donaldson, 27, began MrBeast as a teen gaming channel that soon exploded into a media company worth an estimated $5 billion, with 500 employees and 450 million subscribers who watch its games, stunts and giveaways.
Mavromatis, who was hired in 2022 as its head of Instagram, described a pervasive climate of discrimination and harassment, according to the lawsuit.
In her complaint, she alleges the company’s former CEO James Warren made her meet him at his home for one-on-one meetings while he commented on her looks and dismissed her complaints about a male client’s unwanted advances, telling her “she should be honored that the client was hitting on her.”
When Mavromatis asked Warren why MrBeast, Donaldson, would not work with her, she was told that “she is a beautiful woman and her appearance had a certain sexual effect on Jimmy,” and, “Let’s just say that when you’re around and he goes to the restroom, he’s not actually using the restroom.”
Paez refuted the claim.
“That’s ridiculous. This is an allegation fabricated for the sole purpose of sparking headlines,” Paez said.
Mavromatis said she endured a slate of other indignities such as being told by Donaldson that she “would only participate in her video shoot if she brought him a beer.”
“In this male-centric workplace, Plaintiff, one of the few women in a high-level role, was excluded from otherwise all-male meetings, demeaned in front of colleagues, harassed, and suffered from males be given preferential treatment in employment decisions,” states the complaint.
When Mavromatis raised a question during a staff meeting with her team, she said a male colleague told her to “shut up” or “stop talking.”
At MrBeast headquarters in Greenville, N.C., she said male executives mocked female contestants participating in BeastGames, “who complained they did not have access to feminine hygiene products and clean underwear while participating in the show.”
In November 2023, Mavromatis formally complained about “the sexually inappropriate encounters and harassment, and demeaning and hostile work environment she and other female employees had been living and experiencing working at MrBeast,” to the company’s then head of human resources, Sue Parisher, who is also Donaldson’s mother, according to the suit.
In her complaint, Mavromatis said Beast Industries did not have a method or process for employees to report such issues either anonymously or to a third party, rather employees were expected to follow the company’s handbook, “How to Succeed In MrBeast Production.”
In it, employees were instructed that, “It’s okay for the boys to be childish,” “if talent wants to draw a dick on the white board in the video or do something stupid, let them” and “No does not mean no,” according to the complaint.
Mavromatis alleges that she was demoted and then fired.
Paez said that Mavromatis’s role was eliminated as part of a reorganization of an underperforming group within Beast Industries and that she was made aware of this.
-
World1 minute agoIran escalates Hormuz ‘tit-for-tat,’ seizes ship tied to billionaire close to Trump, Macron
-
Politics7 minutes agoTrump Cabinet member scraps Obama-era gender identity housing rule, cites ‘biological reality’
-
Health13 minutes agoRiley Gaines shares 5 wellness tips she swears by as a new mom: ‘Really powerful’
-
Sports19 minutes agoChiefs and Browns make first trade of 2026 draft and both eventually fill needs
-
Technology25 minutes agoHow Florida retiree lost $200K in fake PayPal refund scam
-
Business31 minutes ago
Senate committee kills bill mandating insurance coverage for wildfire safe homes
-
Entertainment37 minutes agoFormer Live Nation executive says he was fired after raising ‘financial misconduct’ concerns
-
Lifestyle43 minutes agoThey set out to elevate karaoke in L.A. — and opened a glamorous lounge that pulls out all the stops