Experts say social-media algorithms amplify conspiracy theories in Lindsay Clancy trial

As the trial of Lindsay Clancy, a Massachusetts mother charged with killing her three children, draws to a close, social-media platforms have become flooded with speculation and conspiracy theories. Amateur investigators on TikTok and other sites have highlighted perceived inconsistencies, such as Clancy’s recorded heart rate and body temperature, and have suggested that her ex-husband, Patrick Clancy, might be responsible, despite a lack of legal evidence.

"Obsessive engagement with trials is as old as the media," said Whitney Phillips, associate professor of information politics and media ethics at the University of Oregon. She noted that high-profile cases have historically sparked intense public interest, a pattern that has intensified with modern digital media.

Phillips and Kathryn Coduto, an assistant professor of media science at Boston University, said TikTok’s algorithm, which prioritizes engagement over follower count, amplifies such content. Coduto explained that the platform learns to show users more of a topic that keeps them watching, allowing conspiracy videos to spread more widely than they would in a traditional media environment.

"People who otherwise wouldn’t have been naturally interested in the story find that the story is pushed at them," Phillips added.

Coduto also observed that many users feel a sense of purpose by discussing the trial as it unfolds, describing the case as a “real-time dialogue” that offers a community for participants.

One TikTok creator, screenwriter and Syracuse University professor Taylor Vaughn Lasley, posted a video outlining three narrative elements she would emphasize if the case were adapted for television, suggesting they could imply Clancy’s innocence. The video quickly went viral, and Lasley defended her approach, stating that questioning story gaps is part of her professional role and not an attempt to profit from the tragedy. She noted a 30 % rise in her TikTok earnings during the period she covered the trial.

The influence of social media reached the courtroom when Clancy’s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, sought to call Emily Thorndike—a former McLean Hospital employee who posted a TikTok about her experience there—as a witness. Thorndike’s ten-minute video disputed prosecution claims about daily medical examinations during Clancy’s stay. Although a judge deemed her testimony credible, it was excluded for limited relevance.

"I was surprised that Reddington actually even bothered with her," former prosecutor Margaret McLean said, describing the move as an attempt to gain attention.

The case illustrates how algorithm-driven platforms can magnify unverified narratives, prompting concerns among scholars about the spread of misinformation in high-profile legal proceedings.