Meta’s antitrust case
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is accusing Meta (formerly Facebook) of illegally maintaining a monopoly in the personal social networking (PSN) space.
The FTC claims Meta bought rising competitors like Instagram (2012) and WhatsApp (2014) to eliminate threats.
If the FTC wins, Meta might have to sell off Instagram and WhatsApp.
The case has had rare bipartisan support in the U.S. across different administrations.
Meta’s key arguments against the FTC
Meta says the FTC's view of the social media market is too narrow and ignores competitors like TikTok, YouTube, and X (formerly Twitter).
Meta insists it is not a monopoly and that buying Instagram and WhatsApp helped improve those platforms.
It claims the FTC is unfairly targeting an American company while China-owned TikTok continues to grow.
Meta showcased that features across apps (Reels, Shorts, TikTok) are similar and that users often switch between platforms.
What role did Mark Zuckerberg’s political affiliations play in the trial?
Zuckerberg reportedly tried to align with Trump to gain political support — attending events, donating funds, and shifting company policies.
Despite these efforts, he was still required to testify in court.
He was questioned about his old emails discussing Instagram’s threat to Facebook and possible strategies to counter it.
Has the FTC sued Meta before?
Yes. In 2019, the FTC fined Meta $5 billion for breaking privacy rules.
In 2023, Meta also sued the FTC over stricter data rules, including those protecting children’s data.
Could Meta be forced to divest Instagram and WhatsApp?
It’s uncertain. The FTC’s original case was dismissed but later revived with more evidence.
The court warned that proving Meta’s monopoly won’t be easy.
Still, concern over Meta’s power is shared by many U.S. officials, regardless of their political party.
COMMENTS