Podcast Summary: Question Everything

Episode: "I Believed Sandy Hook Was a Hoax"

Host: Brian Reed
Guests: Kate (pseudonym), Joan Donovan, Father Bob, Guillaume Chaslot
Date: October 16, 2025

Overview

In this episode of Question Everything, Brian Reed explores the personal journey of Kate, a young woman who once believed the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was a hoax—a widely-propagated conspiracy theory. The episode unpacks how such destructive lies spread online, the emotional and relational fallout for believers and victims, and makes a forceful case for reforming Section 230, a law that shields internet platforms from liability for user-generated content. Reed weaves together Kate’s story, expert analysis, and a call to action, positioning this episode as a template for understanding the real human costs of online disinformation and the urgent need for legal change.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Introduction to Kate’s Story and the Power of Internet Lies

• [01:27] Brian introduces Kate: "For years, Kate believed a lie, a terrible lie that spread on the Internet, on social media, which lots of Americans believed. It's a lie that really hurt people, individuals, and our society as a whole."
• Reed sets the stage for Kate as both a victim and a former algorithmic amplifier of misinformation, connecting her story to his personal crusade against Section 230.

2. Brian Reed’s Mission Against Section 230

• [01:45 - 03:31] Reed articulates his personal campaign: "We need to strip that protection away. And I think Kate's story is a perfect example of why."
• He explains Section 230’s legal shield for internet platforms, emphasizing the anonymity and lack of accountability for platforms that enable and recommend harmful content.

3. Kate’s Path to Belief in the Sandy Hook Hoax

• [04:42] At the Iowa State Fair, Kate reveals:

  "As far as Sandy Hook, I was one that grew up thinking that that's a hoax.”
  (Kate, 04:42)

• Reed provides personal context—he grew up near Sandy Hook and underscores the tangible reality and pain of the tragedy.
• Kate’s childhood in Iowa, her father’s influence, and exposure to Alex Jones/Infowars are explored in detail.
• [10:19] Kate recalls:

  "I remember so vividly my dad just kind of saying like, this was put on by the government... This is not real."
  (Kate, 10:19)

• Her father, shaped by online conspiracy networks, became a vector for misinformation at home; Kate’s mother was apolitical and went along with the dominant narrative.

4. The Mechanics of Belief and Socialization

• Kate describes how her dad “proved” the hoax with misunderstood or doctored images and Alex Jones clips:

  "How could this possibly be real when this picture exists?"
  (Kate, 11:45)

• Kate admits:

  “Why would he lie?”
  (Kate, 12:29)

• The hoax belief became tied up with Republican identity and distrust of government.

5. The Emotional Legacy of Disinformation

• Kate links her belief in the hoax to numbness, fear, and diminished empathy:

  “It did incite fear. And I think that's what worked so well...”
  (Kate, 13:52)

• She analogizes the conspiracy belief to school “scared straight” programs—more comfortable than believing in mass murder of children.

6. The Turning Point: College and Critical Reassessment

• In college, Kate’s exposure to broader perspectives and critical classes (Women’s and Gender Studies) led her to reassess previously-held beliefs.
• [15:08]

  “That course opened my eyes to everything... I had learned about social constructs, patriarchy.”
  (Kate, 15:08)

• A classroom discussion on the Sandy Hook anniversary made her confront reality:

  "I am realizing right now that this is real."
  (Kate, 16:20)

• She describes the difficulty of feeling empathy after years of denial, even after her mind changed.

7. Social Consequences and Self-Reflection

• Student reaction was mixed, ranging from empathy to anger, with some labeling her belief “stupid.”
• Kate reflects:

  “I felt stupid, ashamed. Yeah, I did.”
  (Kate, 18:53)

• Reed reassures her about the speed with which her beliefs changed once confronted with evidence:

  “Within a year of you leaving your house, you heard the truth and believed it. Within seconds of hearing the truth... you believed it. So give yourself some credit.”
  (Brian Reed, 19:14)

8. Lingering Effects and Relationship Strain

• Kate's relationship with her father remains deeply strained; he continues to believe the hoax.
• Out of guilt and a sense of responsibility, Kate wishes to share her story as acknowledgment and atonement.

9. Editorial Perspective: Disinformation Dulls Empathy

• Reed remarks:

  “Maybe this is actually another really big and important impact of lies and disinformation, which is it dulls empathy for other people.”
  (Brian Reed, 23:14)

• Kate agrees that detachment from reality diminished her capacity for empathy for victims.

10. The Case for Amending Section 230

• Reed pivots to the systemic question: How does a law written in 1996 shield today’s platform-driven, algorithm-amplified lies?
• He details the limitations of defamation law and how, even after enormous judgments (e.g., Alex Jones), platforms remain untouchable due to Section 230.
• Notable analogy:
  Reed likens social platforms’ algorithms to a “mailman” who doesn’t just deliver letters, but copies and redistributes the most inflammatory ones:

  "Would you say in that case the mailman is just a conduit for someone else's message? Or has he transformed into a different role?..."
  (Brian Reed, 31:05)

• He marshals expert voices (Joan Donovan, Guillaume Chaslot) and whistleblower testimony (Frances Haugen) to show platforms’ conscious design choices that favor engagement (and thus lies) over truth and safety.

11. Deep Dive: How Social Media Algorithms Amplify Lies

• [31:40] Joan Donovan:

  “Social media engagement is engineered up the wazoo.”
  (Joan Donovan, 31:40)

• Lies travel faster and farther on social media because algorithms favor material that maximizes attention and engagement—often incendiary or conspiratorial content.
• Frances Haugen’s whistleblowing provided direct evidence of Facebook’s (Meta’s) awareness of these effects and the deliberate prioritization of profit over harm mitigation.
• YouTube engineer Guillaume Chaslot recounts being fired for trying to reform a recommendation engine that pushed viewers toward conspiracy:

  “Conspiracy theories are really easy to make... They're addictive because people who live in this filter bubble ... spend more time on YouTube.”
  (Guillaume Chaslot, 41:56)
  “99.9999% of the choice is from an algorithm that you don't understand and you don't control.”
  (Guillaume Chaslot, 41:44)

12. Closing Argument and Call to Action

• Reed proposes that allowing lawsuits against platforms (as with other publishers) would deter amplification of harmful content.
• Frances Haugen, Lenny Posner, and even Kate herself endorse the overhaul of Section 230:

  “I'd agree with that ... it's a great idea ... give me the petition. ... Let me go out and shout on the corner.”
  (Kate, 46:42)

• Reed plans to push this agenda into Congress and asks listeners for input and support.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

| Timestamp | Speaker | Quote | |---|---|---| | 04:42 | Kate | "As far as Sandy Hook, I was one that grew up thinking that that's a hoax." | | 10:19 | Kate | "This was put on by the government... This is not real." | | 12:29 | Kate | "Why would he lie?" | | 13:52 | Kate | "It did incite fear. And I think that's what worked so well." | | 16:20 | Kate | "I am realizing right now that this is real." | | 18:53 | Kate | "I felt stupid, ashamed. Yeah, I did." | | 19:32 | Kate | "Once the truth was presented to me, it was so easy to change my mind because what I had been told was so outrageous." | | 23:14 | Brian Reed | "Maybe this is actually another really big and important impact of lies and disinformation, which is it dulls empathy for other people." | | 31:05 | Brian Reed | "...Would you say in that case the mailman is just a conduit... Or has he transformed into a different role?" | | 31:40 | Joan Donovan | "Social media engagement is engineered up the wazoo." | | 41:44 | Guillaume Chaslot | "99.9999% of the choice is from an algorithm that you don't understand and you don't control." | | 41:56 | Guillaume Chaslot | "Conspiracy theories are really easy to make... They're addictive because people who live in this filter bubble ... spend more time on YouTube." | | 46:42 | Kate | "Give me the petition. ... Let me go out and shout on the corner." |

Key Timestamps for Important Segments

• [03:31] – Brian Reed frames the episode’s mission and rationale for Section 230 reform.
• [04:42] – Kate publicly discloses her past belief in the Sandy Hook hoax.
• [10:19-13:29] – Kate details her family dynamic and how the conspiracy belief took root.
• [14:38-17:39] – Kate recounts her college awakening and painfully reckons with her former beliefs.
• [22:42] – Reed explores personal and relational fallout; the episode sharply focuses on lost empathy.
• [26:33] – Reed lays out the staggering structure and impacts of Section 230.
• [31:40] – Joan Donovan explains algorithmic amplification of misinformation.
• [41:44] – Guillaume Chaslot on YouTube algorithms and the filter bubble.
• [45:02] – Frances Haugen and Lenny Posner advocate for Section 230 reform.
• [46:42] – Kate, now converted, supports Reed’s petition and advocacy.

Tone & Language

• The episode maintains an empathetic, conversational, and at times confessional tone—reflecting on both personal stories and policy stakes.
• Reed balances journalistic rigor with advocacy, openly discussing his activism and inviting participation.
• Expert guests use plain language, making complex technological and legal concepts accessible without sacrificing depth.
• Kate’s frankness and vulnerability about her past beliefs and transformation are central to the episode’s impact.

Conclusion

This episode of Question Everything is a vivid, deeply human examination of misinformation’s reach—from individual belief systems to mass societal harm. Through Kate’s candid retelling, expert perspectives, and direct calls to action, Brian Reed crystallizes both the urgency and the possibility of better regulating our digital information ecosystem. The show makes an impassioned case that changing Section 230 is vital not only to punish egregious actors, but also to restore empathy and accountability in an age rife with algorithm-driven lies.