Multiple entities can hold responsibility, including:

The lawsuit is also suing three local companies, arguing they had a duty to maintain the bridge.

This was a long running problem that Google was contacted to fix and didn't. They don't bear sole responsibility, but that is negligence that contributed to his death.

the fault is shared. google was mentioned moreso because its big company and that makes a headline

I don't know whether you didn't read the article or are just one of these simpletons incapable of holding an opinion more nuanced that "good or evil", but they are suing the owners.

So in the old days, he would've had a paper map and would have driven off the bridge the same way.

Paper maps don't talk to you and tell you which way to go, do they?

I seriously can't decide whether you're some Google shill or you've just given your brain the day off.

It sounds like their "barrier" was probably traffic cones or sawhorses—easily knocked over, stolen, or destroyed. What should have been there, but apparently wasn't, was a double or triple row of concrete jersey barriers. Or something else that was too heavy or awkward to be easily stolen, or destroyed without leaving serious residue. Nothing like hitting concrete chunks all over the road to make someone slow waaaaaay down and take a look around.

Yeah, I'd say that whoever was responsible for keeping that road blocked off was the major culprit in this. Google is just a "they have deep pockets, and we might be lucky and get a judge who doesn't know squat about how nav systems work" add-on.