The U.S. government’s landmark antitrust trial against Google’s search business [is nearing its conclusion](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/technology/google-antitrust-trial-closing-arguments.html). But the parade of major federal cases challenging Big Tech’s power is just getting going. Under the Trump administration, the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission started investigating Amazon, Apple, Google and Meta, the parent company of Instagram and WhatsApp, for monopolistic behavior. The government has since sued all four companies — Google twice — in what it says is an effort to rein in their power and promote more competition. The companies have denied the claims and are fighting back. Closing arguments wrap up on Friday in Google’s first antitrust suit on allegations that it has a monopoly in internet search. [The judge’s ruling](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/business/judge-mehta-google-antitrust.html#:~:text=narrowed%20its%20scope.-,Judge%20Mehta%20decided%20that%20the%20government%20could%20proceed%20to%20trial,default%20on%20smartphones%20and%20browsers.), expected in the coming weeks or months, is likely to set precedents for the remaining cases. Here’s the latest on the state of the U.S. government v. Big Tech. In September, the [F.T.C. and 17 states sued Amazon](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/26/technology/ftc-amazon.html), accusing it of protecting a monopoly by squeezing sellers on its vast marketplace and favoring its own services. The practices also harmed consumers, the F.T.C. argued, and resulted in some cases of “artificially higher prices” because Amazon prevented those selling goods on its site from offering the same products on other online sites for less. A judge in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington set the beginning of the trial for October 2026. Amazon has asked the judge to dismiss the case and has argued that it often offers low prices to consumers and doesn’t hurt sellers on its marketplace. The lawsuit shows a “fundamental misunderstanding of retail,” the company has argued. The chair of the F.T.C., Lina Khan, who is [famous in certain circles](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/07/technology/monopoly-antitrust-lina-khan-amazon.html) for a 2017 Yale Law Journal antitrust paper on how to rein in Amazon, has vowed to take on Big Tech monopolies. Amazon has described the F.T.C.’s lawsuit as “misguided” and warned that if agency prevailed in its suit, it would “force Amazon to engage in practices that actually _harm_ consumers and the many businesses that sell in our store.” In March, the [Department of Justice sued Apple](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/technology/apple-doj-lawsuit-antitrust.html), accusing the company of using a monopoly in the smartphone market to block competition, inflate prices for consumers and stifle competition. The department joined 15 states and the District of Columbia in its suit after a nearly two-year investigation. In the suit, filed in U.S. District Court of New Jersey, the department said Apple blocked companies from offering applications that competed with Apple products like cloud-based streaming apps, messaging and the digital wallet. Apple has said that it plans to file a motion to dismiss the case and that its business decisions don’t violate antitrust laws. It has also argued that those decisions make the iPhone a better experience. “This lawsuit threatens who we are and the principles that set Apple products apart in fiercely competitive markets,” Apple said in a statement. “We believe this lawsuit is wrong on the facts and the law, and we will vigorously defend against it.” In addition to the search lawsuit, the Justice Department filed a [separate suit against Googl](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/24/technology/google-ads-lawsuit.html)e in January over online advertising. That case is expected to go to trial in September. The department and eight states sued in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, saying Google acquired rivals through anticompetitive mergers and bullied publishers and advertisers into using the company’s ad technology. Last month, Google asked a federal judge to dismiss the case, arguing that the ad technology market is competitive and that the lawsuit could harm innovation and thousands of small businesses that rely on the online advertising market. In the search lawsuit, if the judge rules against Google, he will need to suggest changes to the company’s business to fix anything determined illegal. The F.T.C. sued Meta in December 2020, accusing the company of creating a monopoly in social media by buying Instagram and WhatsApp. The mergers deprived consumers of alternative social media platforms, the F.T.C. argued. The lawsuit has taken more twists and turns that the other Big Tech antitrust cases. It was filed in U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia before the company changed its name to Meta, from Facebook. In 2021, Judge James Boasberg dismissed the complaint, saying the F.T.C. didn’t adequately define the market that it accused Meta of monopolizing. But he allowed the agency to refile its lawsuit, and it moved forward the next year. The F.T.C. joined 40 states in [accusing Facebook of buying](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/19/technology/ftc-facebook-antitrust.html?action=click&pgtype=Article&state=default&module=styln-big-tech&variant=show&region=MAIN_CONTENT_1&block=storyline_levelup_swipe_recirc) both Instagram and WhatsApp more than a decade ago to [illegally squash competition](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/09/technology/facebook-antitrust-monopoly.html?action=click&pgtype=Article&state=default&module=styln-big-tech&variant=show&region=MAIN_CONTENT_1&block=storyline_levelup_swipe_recirc) that could have one day challenged the company’s dominance. The regulators have called for the deals to be unwound. Meta has argued that it didn’t acquire Instagram and WhatsApp to kill competition and that it has invested heavily in developing innovations for the apps.

European Union regulators hit Facebook parent Meta with a fine of nearly 800 million euros on Thursday for what it calls “abusive practices” involving its Marketplace online classified ads business LONDON -- European Union regulators issued their first antitrust fine to Facebook parent Meta on Thursday with a penalty of nearly 800 million euros for what they call “abusive practices” involving its Marketplace online classified ads business. The European Commission, the 27-nation bloc's executive branch and top antitrust enforcer, issued the 797.72 million euro ($841 million) penalty after its [long-running investigation](https://apnews.com/article/europe-technology-business-a44f2f093471ffa7ea8ff8e23f8282da) found that the company abused its dominant position and engaged in anti-competitive behavior. It’s the first time the EU has imposed a fine on the social media giant for breaches of the bloc’s competition law. Brussels has already slapped Big Tech rivals [Google](https://apnews.com/article/google-european-union-antitrust-shopping-court-a281e4e4722efa816e929a52a9939d86) and [Apple](https://apnews.com/article/apple-antitrust-fine-music-streaming-europe-439e3e8af91d844dee3dc8ff8012c68f) with billions in antitrust penalties. The commission had [accused Meta](https://apnews.com/article/technology-europe-business-european-union-f688beadd49ab55e326e163960675f19) of distorting competition by tying its online classified ad business to its social network, automatically exposing Facebook users to Marketplace “whether they want it or not" and shutting out competitors. It was also concerned that Meta was imposing unfair trading conditions with terms of service that authorized the company to use ad-related data — generated from competing classified ad platforms who advertise on Facebook or Instagram — to benefit Marketplace. Meta's practices gave it “advantages that other online classified ads service providers could not match,” Margrethe Vestager, the commission's executive vice-president in charge of competition policy, said in a press release “This is illegal under EU antitrust rules. Meta must now stop this behaviour.” Meta said in a statement that the decision fails to prove any “competitive harm” to rivals or consumers and “ignores the realities of the thriving European market for online classified listing services.” The company said the Commission's case ignores the fact that Facebook users can choose to ”engage with Marketplace, and many don't." It said online marketplaces, including global sites like eBay, Europe-wide platforms like Vinted, and national services are continuing to grow. Meta said it would comply with the Commission's order to end the offending conduct and not repeat it, but also vowed to appeal. The case dates back to 2021, when European Union regulators and their counterparts in Britain opened dual investigations into the classified business. The British regulator [wrapped up its investigation](https://apnews.com/article/amazon-meta-britain-antitrust-a63bf08544e67bd3e5eda5c4077f37c8) last year after Meta made concessions. The company continues to face EU scrutiny on other fronts, including investigations into whether Facebook and Instagram [child safety](https://apnews.com/article/facebook-instagram-meta-european-union-digital-services-act-61653e20757e75671092fb746e41ed4b) and [election integrity](https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-instagram-1fea720aeb5def876a6d415ed6136463) measures comply with the bloc’s digital rulebook. Meta has previously been hit with a series of [fines](https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-european-union-privacy-e40ab7bfa674b91bffb2813dce9b04d1) for breaches of the EU’s stringent privacy laws, including a [record 1.2 billion euro penalty](https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-data-privacy-fine-europe-9aa912200226c3d53aa293dca8968f84) last year.

European Union regulators hit Facebook parent Meta with a fine of nearly 800 million euros on Thursday for what it calls “abusive practices” involving its Marketplace online classified ads business LONDON -- European Union regulators issued their first antitrust fine to Facebook parent Meta on Thursday with a penalty of nearly 800 million euros for what they call “abusive practices” involving its Marketplace online classified ads business. The European Commission, the 27-nation bloc's executive branch and top antitrust enforcer, issued the 797.72 million euro ($841 million) penalty after its [long-running investigation](https://apnews.com/article/europe-technology-business-a44f2f093471ffa7ea8ff8e23f8282da) found that the company abused its dominant position and engaged in anti-competitive behavior. It’s the first time the EU has imposed a fine on the social media giant for breaches of the bloc’s competition law. Brussels has already slapped Big Tech rivals [Google](https://apnews.com/article/google-european-union-antitrust-shopping-court-a281e4e4722efa816e929a52a9939d86) and [Apple](https://apnews.com/article/apple-antitrust-fine-music-streaming-europe-439e3e8af91d844dee3dc8ff8012c68f) with billions in antitrust penalties. The commission had [accused Meta](https://apnews.com/article/technology-europe-business-european-union-f688beadd49ab55e326e163960675f19) of distorting competition by tying its online classified ad business to its social network, automatically exposing Facebook users to Marketplace “whether they want it or not" and shutting out competitors. It was also concerned that Meta was imposing unfair trading conditions with terms of service that authorized the company to use ad-related data — generated from competing classified ad platforms who advertise on Facebook or Instagram — to benefit Marketplace. Meta's practices gave it “advantages that other online classified ads service providers could not match,” Margrethe Vestager, the commission's executive vice-president in charge of competition policy, said in a press release “This is illegal under EU antitrust rules. Meta must now stop this behaviour.” Meta said in a statement that the decision fails to prove any “competitive harm” to rivals or consumers and “ignores the realities of the thriving European market for online classified listing services.” The company said the Commission's case ignores the fact that Facebook users can choose to ”engage with Marketplace, and many don't." It said online marketplaces, including global sites like eBay, Europe-wide platforms like Vinted, and national services are continuing to grow. Meta said it would comply with the Commission's order to end the offending conduct and not repeat it, but also vowed to appeal. The case dates back to 2021, when European Union regulators and their counterparts in Britain opened dual investigations into the classified business. The British regulator [wrapped up its investigation](https://apnews.com/article/amazon-meta-britain-antitrust-a63bf08544e67bd3e5eda5c4077f37c8) last year after Meta made concessions. The company continues to face EU scrutiny on other fronts, including investigations into whether Facebook and Instagram [child safety](https://apnews.com/article/facebook-instagram-meta-european-union-digital-services-act-61653e20757e75671092fb746e41ed4b) and [election integrity](https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-instagram-1fea720aeb5def876a6d415ed6136463) measures comply with the bloc’s digital rulebook. Meta has previously been hit with a series of [fines](https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-european-union-privacy-e40ab7bfa674b91bffb2813dce9b04d1) for breaches of the EU’s stringent privacy laws, including a [record 1.2 billion euro penalty](https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-data-privacy-fine-europe-9aa912200226c3d53aa293dca8968f84) last year.

Meta is [testing a feature](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-08/meta-floats-ebay-ads-solution-to-comply-with-eu-antitrust-order) that will let Facebook users browse eBay listings on Facebook Marketplace before being redirected to complete the purchase on eBay. The test, which is being launched to a small group in Germany, France, and the U.S. starting Wednesday, is an attempt to resolve charges by the European Union that the social media giant uses anticompetitive behavior. Antitrust enforcers argued that Meta illegally shut out competition by linking Marketplace to its social media network and advertises Marketplace to consumers regardless of opting in or not. Meta said it is still continuing to appeal the European Commission’s decision. In November, it was [fined $840 million](https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/14/tech/meta-fine-europe-facebook-marketplace-intl/index.html) over abusive practices meant to benefit Marketplace. “While we disagree with and continue to appeal the European Commission’s decision on Facebook Marketplace, we are working quickly and constructively to build a solution which addresses the points raised,” Meta said in a [statement](https://about.fb.com/news/2024/11/our-response-to-the-european-commissions-decision-on-facebook-marketplace/). Ebay said in a [blog post](https://community.ebay.com/t5/Announcements/Introducing-eBay-s-partnership-with-Facebook-Marketplace/ba-p/34868556#:~:text=Will%20my%20items,set%20on%20eBay.) that a select number of listings from “a variety of categories” will start showing up on some users’ Marketplaces. That includes both local and shipped items. Shares of eBay were up on the news. “This could benefit people using both platforms,” Meta said. “EBay sellers will gain exposure to Facebook’s audience while people using Marketplace will be able to discover a broader array of listings from the eBay community.” Expand to continue reading ↓

[Meta](https://www.fastcompany.com/section/meta) said Wednesday that it will allow some Facebook users to view eBay listings on its Marketplace service, as it tries out a possible way to resolve European Union charges of [anticompetitive behavior](https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-european-union-competition-fine-6886192353a344126a15886d6ca7c627) that the bloc leveled last year. The social media company said it’s launching a test that will let Facebook users in Germany, France and the U.S. browse eBay listings directly on its Marketplace online classifieds service but complete the transaction on eBay. Meta is carrying out the trial after [Brussels slapped the company in November with a penalty of nearly 800 million euros ($824 million)](https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-european-union-competition-fine-6886192353a344126a15886d6ca7c627) for what it called “abusive practices” involving Marketplace. European Union antitrust enforcers accused Meta of illegally shutting out competition by tying Marketplace to its social network and automatically exposing Facebook users to Marketplace whether or not they wanted it. They also accused Meta of gaining an unfair advantage through ad-related data. “While we disagree with and continue to appeal the European Commission’s decision on Facebook Marketplace, we are working quickly and constructively to build a solution which addresses the points raised,” Meta said in a blog post, adding that its solution could benefit people on both platforms. The European Commission, the 27-nation bloc’s top antitrust enforcer, said it had “no specific comment,” saying only that Meta must comply with the decision issued in mid-November within 90 days. Shares of eBay jumped on the news. The company said that starting Wednesday a “select number of eBay listings” in the three countries “will be seamlessly integrated and viewable on Facebook Marketplace.” The listings will be from a “variety of categories,” based on factors including shopping trends and listing quality, it said, without being more specific. Expand to continue reading ↓

Meta says it will allow some Facebook users to view eBay listings on its Marketplace service Meta said Wednesday that it will allow some Facebook users to view eBay listings on its Marketplace service, as it tries out a possible way to resolve European Union charges of [anticompetitive behavior](https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-european-union-competition-fine-6886192353a344126a15886d6ca7c627) that the bloc leveled last year. The social media company said it's launching a test that will let Facebook users in Germany, France and the U.S. browse eBay listings directly on its Marketplace online classifieds service but complete the transaction on eBay. Meta is carrying out the trial after [Brussels slapped the company in November with a penalty of nearly 800 million euros ($824 million)](https://apnews.com/article/meta-facebook-european-union-competition-fine-6886192353a344126a15886d6ca7c627) for what it called “abusive practices” involving Marketplace. European Union antitrust enforcers accused Meta of illegally shutting out competition by tying Marketplace to its social network and automatically exposing Facebook users to Marketplace whether or not they wanted it. They also accused Meta of gaining an unfair advantage through ad-related data. “While we disagree with and continue to appeal the European Commission’s decision on Facebook Marketplace, we are working quickly and constructively to build a solution which addresses the points raised,” Meta said in a blog post, adding that its solution could benefit people on both platforms. The European Commission, the 27-nation bloc's top antitrust enforcer, said it had “no specific comment," saying only that Meta must comply with the decision issued in mid-November within 90 days. Shares of eBay jumped on the news. The company said that starting Wednesday a “select number of eBay listings” in the three countries “will be seamlessly integrated and viewable on Facebook Marketplace.” The listings will be from a “variety of categories,” based on factors including shopping trends and listing quality, it said, without being more specific. Buyers will complete their transactions following the same process as they would when buying directly through the eBay website and will be covered by the platform's money-back guarantee and other protections, it said.

Meta is set to face off against the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on Monday in an antitrust trial that could force the social media giant to divest itself of Instagram and WhatsApp. The closely watched trial carries high stakes for Meta’s $1.3 trillion market value. The company depends heavily on advertising revenue from Instagram, and losing control of the platform could deal a significant blow to its business. Here’s what to know about the FTC trial. Meta acquired Instagram for $1 billion in 2012 and WhatsApp for $19 billion in 2014. The government argues that Meta didn’t buy these companies for their products or technology, but rather to eliminate potential competition. Prosecutors say it reflects CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s well-known strategy of buying rivals instead of competing with them. “Acquiring these competitive threats has enabled Facebook to sustain its dominance—to the detriment of competition and users—not by competing on the merits, but by avoiding competition,” the FTC wrote in a [complaint](https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/ecf_75-1_ftc_v_facebook_public_redacted_fac.pdf). That strategy, they allege, has led to a decrease in the quality of Meta’s products. The FTC wants Meta to breakup with Instagram and WhatsApp. That would mean the tech giant would have to spin off the two highly popular platforms into their own companies. Such a move could be detrimental to its broader advertising business. Instagram this year is expected to bring in more than half of Meta’s total U.S. ad revenue, or more than $32 billion, [_Adweek_ reported](https://www.adweek.com/media/meta-stands-to-lose-tens-of-billions-of-ad-spend-in-impending-ftc-antitrust-trial/). Expand to continue reading ↓

 The Federal Trade Commission's [blockbuster antitrust case](https://www.npr.org/2022/01/11/1072169787/judge-allows-federal-trade-commissions-latest-suit-against-facebook-to-move-forw) against Meta kicks off on Monday in a courtroom in Washington. It's the culmination of a nearly six-year investigation into whether the social media giant broke competition laws in acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp. At stake is the future Meta's $1.4 trillion advertising business and the prospect of having to spin off its hugely popular services into separate companies — a corporate breakup the likes of which has not been seen since AT&T's telephone monopoly was forced to split apart more than 40 years ago. Lawyers for the FTC and Meta will deliver opening statements on Monday before U.S. District Judge James Boasberg in a trial expected to stretch for seven to eight weeks. Reams of evidence and dozens of witnesses will be scrutinized. The government plans to call CEO Mark Zuckerberg, former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg and the head of Instagram, Adam Mosseri, to the witness stand. ### What is the FTC's case against Meta? The [FTC argues](https://www.npr.org/2020/12/09/944073889/48-attorneys-general-sue-facebook-alleging-illegal-power-grabs-to-neutralize-riv) that when Meta acquired Instagram, in 2012, and WhatsApp, two years later, that it was part of a strategy to eliminate competition and maintain monopoly power over the social media market. The government contends that a "buy or bury" strategy propelled Meta's acquisitions, leading Meta to gobble up competitors it viewed as threats, or to squash the rivals out of business altogether. In a 2012 internal email government lawyers plan to present, Zuckerberg [wrote](https://www.npr.org/2020/12/11/945234491/the-wrath-of-mark-takeaways-from-the-governments-case-against-facebook) that buying Instagram was motivated by a desire to "neutralize a potential competitor." The FTC says this alleged behavior is illegal under federal antitrust laws. ### What remedy does the FTC want? The government argues the only way to restore competition to the social media marketplace is for Meta to be forced to unwind its purchase of both Instagram and WhatsApp. The government says divesting those apps will allow smaller social media companies compete for consumers and ad dollars and loosen Meta's grip on the industry. ### How is Meta expected to respond in court? Meta counters that it is being punished for being an innovative and aggressive tech company. It has always competed fairly, Meta's lawyers say, and regulators are attempting to punish the tech titan's runaway success. Lawyers for Meta have also said in court filings that the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp were approved by regulators more than a decade ago. Yet the FTC maintains that Meta was not forthcoming to regulators who cleared the purchases, claiming Meta withheld key information about the company to win the blessing of Washington. Another important facet to Meta's defense is just how crowded the social media world is today, versus 2012 and 2014, when the company made those purchases. Meta says it faces fierce competition from Elon Musk's X, TikTok, Snapchat and many other social media platforms. In a statement ahead of opening statements, Meta said: "its evidence at trial will show what every 17-year-old in the world knows: Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp compete with Chinese-owned TikTok, YouTube, X, iMessage and many others. More than 10 years after the FTC reviewed and cleared our acquisitions, the Commission's action in this case sends the message that no deal is ever truly final." ### **What would it mean for users of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp if Meta was forced to break up?** The FTC says it would mean more robust competition among social media startups, and therefore better quality services for everyone. Government lawyers argue that Meta's services have degraded in quality in part because of its dominant position in the marketplace. Regulators also say Meta's privacy protections have lapsed as a result of its alleged monopoly status. To the FTC, a break-up would translate into a more vibrant social media landscape, where new upstarts can go toe to toe with Meta's apps. But Meta contends the opposite: That a breakup would make each of its individual apps less integrated and worse for consumers after many years in which Meta's systems and data have become entwined. ### **What about the politics of the case? How does CEO Mark Zuckerberg's relationship with Trump play into this trial?** This case first started in Trump's first term, in December 2020. That's when Trump still had a bitter feud with Zuckerberg, but the two have been less confrontational of late. Before he won the November election, Trump threatened to throw Zuckerberg in prison, saying if Zuckerberg's platforms did anything to hurt Trump's chances on the campaign trail, he would "spend the rest of his life in prison." Like many other executives in Silicon Valley, Zuckerberg has recently been ingratiating himself with the Trump administration. Zuckeberg has publicly praised Trump; he donated $1 million to Trump's inaugural committee; he [agreed to pay](https://www.npr.org/2025/01/29/nx-s1-5279570/meta-trump-settlement-facebook-instagram-suspensions) Trump $25 million to settle a suit Trump filed for being suspended from Facebook and Instagram in the wake of Jan. 6; and he's made company-wide shifts that align with Trump's priorities, like [ending Facebook and Instagram's fact-checking program](https://www.npr.org/2025/01/07/nx-s1-5251151/meta-fact-checking-mark-zuckerberg-trump) and rolling back diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Zuckerberg has also made visits to Trump's Mar-a-Lago club reportedly to lobby the president to drop the case. There has been speculation that Trump could abandon the trial and settle with Meta but so far, all indications point to the case sticking. FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson has said his lawyers are "raring to go" against Meta. That said, he also has said he would "obey lawful orders" from the president. In other words, the start of the trial does not take a settlement off the time. The two sides could reach a settlement in the midst of the trial, though legal experts say it is highly unlikely.

Apr 13, 2025 7:34 PM The blockbuster antitrust case begins Monday. Its outcome could impact how Big Tech companies grow—but the government has a long way to go to prove its case.  Mark Zuckerberg attends the UFC 313 event at T-Mobile Arena on March 08, 2025, in Las Vegas, Nevada.Photograph: Chris Unger/Getty Images The US Federal Trade Commission's trial against [Meta](https://www.wired.com/tag/meta/) begins in Washington, DC on Monday, as the tech giant fights to avoid the spinoff of Instagram and WhatsApp. The FTC alleges that Meta illegally acquired the two startups in an effort to [suppress competition](https://www.wired.com/tag/antitrust/). Meta (then Facebook) bought the photo-sharing startup Instagram for $1 billion in 2012. About two years later, the company snatched up the chat tool WhatsApp for roughly $22 billion. The FTC, one of the nation’s antitrust enforcement agencies, wants Judge James Boasberg to hold the tech giant liable for executing these mega deals to [illegally maintain a social media monopoly](https://www.wired.com/story/lina-khan-theory-facebook-antitrust-case-takes-shape/). It has called on Boasberg to restore competition by ordering Meta to [sell off its prized assets](https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-not-monopoly-but-should-broken-up/). A victory for the government could deter big tech companies from acquiring startups in the future, cutting off a key source of innovation and investment returns for venture capitalists. The initial trial could last up to 37 days, wrapping as late as early July. If needed, a trial to decide on penalties would follow—likely next year. Appeals of any rulings could take additional years to resolve. So WhatsApp and Instagram aren’t going on sale anytime soon. But the possibility of losing two valuable properties helps explain why Mark Zuckerberg [has reportedly](https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/meta-antitrust-trial-zuckerberg-lobbying-trump-67c8f3a5) been exploring a last-minute deal with President Donald Trump and White House officials to avert a fight in court. So far, those efforts appear unsuccessful. Here’s what to expect as the trial kicks off. What Is the FTC Arguing? ------------------------ First, the FTC must prove that Facebook has a longstanding monopoly on “providing personal social networking services in the US,” [according to its lawsuit](https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/2021-09-08_redacted_substitute_amended_complaint_ecf_no._82.pdf). The category Facebook allegedly monopolizes includes services such as Snapchat and little-known [MeWe](https://www.wired.com/story/tiktoks-suitors-face-an-uphill-battle/), but notably excludes YouTube, TikTok, and other platforms that the FTC believes are more for watching videos by creators than following family and friends. From 2012 to 2020, Facebook commanded over 80 percent of users’ time per year within this narrowly defined market. Second, it must show the acquisitions harmed competition in the social networking market. Around the time the Instagram and WhatsApp deal talks began, Facebook feared the threats that app startups posed to its monopoly, according to the lawsuit. [Citing emails between Zuckerberg and other company executives](https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-ftc-antitrust-case-smoking-gun/)—like Zuckerberg writing once that “it is better to buy than compete"—the FTC alleges that the company decided to buy nascent competitors to gain more time to figure out its own app development strategy. “Unable to maintain its monopoly by fairly competing, the company’s executives addressed the existential threat by buying up new innovators that were succeeding where Facebook failed,” the lawsuit alleges. [The FTC claims](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.224921/gov.uscourts.dcd.224921.533.0.pdf) that after buying Instagram and WhatsApp, Facebook had fewer apps nipping at its heels and got away with providing less data privacy to users and more buggy and expensive services to advertisers. The deals also sent a message to competitors: companies trying to independently beat Facebook wouldn’t be able to get very far, the FTC says. This further stifled competition, according to the lawsuit. What Does the FTC Want? ----------------------- The commission would like competition to be restored, including possibly by having Meta divest Instagram and WhatsApp. That could be disastrous for Meta, which relies on Instagram for a significant portion of its ad revenue—[an estimated 50 percent or more in the US](https://www.emarketer.com/press-releases/instagram-will-make-up-more-than-half-of-metas-us-ad-revenues-in-2025/#:~:text=In%202025%2C%20Instagram%20will%20generate,half%20for%20the%20first%20time.). Other measures could include blocking Meta from completing similar deals in the future. What Is Meta’s Defense? ----------------------- The company’s primary argument is that the commission is defining the market too narrowly. Meta argues that a variety of social apps including TikTok and YouTube are very much competitors to Facebook. Add them into the mix, and Facebook can no longer be viewed as monopolist, the company says. Should that argument not result in immediate victory for Meta, its other key contention is that the FTC has been unable to demonstrate that consumers and advertisers are worse off because of the company’s ownership of Instagram and WhatsApp—which it views as a requirement for the FTC’s case. Meta has said that the apps would not have become as successful as they are today without its stewardship. “The FTC must prove that consumers would have had more (or better) options sooner without the acquisitions,” the company’s attorneys [wrote in court papers last week](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.224921/gov.uscourts.dcd.224921.518.0.pdf). “Meta respectfully submits that the FTC will not be able to introduce any evidence to satisfy its burden.” Meta also asserts that the internal company emails allegedly about using acquisitions to thwart competition are meaningless, because it considers intent irrelevant to this case. What matters is whether the social media market today is less competitive than it was before the acquisitions, according to last week’s court filing. Why Is Trump Involved? ---------------------- The FTC filed the case at the end of President Trump’s first term at a time when Republicans controlled the commission 3-2. Two of the Republican commissioners voted against the filing at the time. This January, after beginning his second term in the White House, Trump tapped Andrew Ferguson to chair the FTC. Last month, Trump fired two Democrats on the panel. The targeted commissioners are suing, arguing the move was an unconstitutional exercise of presidential power. In the meantime, the commission consists of just Ferguson and two other Republicans. In the past, Trump complained that Meta allegedly [censored conservative viewpoints](https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-joel-kaplan-washington-political-influence/) on social media. In recent months, Zuckerberg [has](https://www.wired.com/story/plaintext-meta-zuckerberg-maga-trump/) [relaxed policies that Republicans criticized](https://www.wired.com/story/meta-ditches-fact-checkers-in-favor-of-x-style-community-notes/), and [gotten personally involved in resolving a lawsuit](https://www.wired.com/story/meta-2024-earnings-dei-trump/) Trump filed against the company after he was banned from Facebook in 2021. Meta also donated to Trump’s second inauguration fund. The warming relationship has fueled public speculation that Trump could direct Ferguson and the FTC to drop or settle the antitrust case against Meta. Ferguson [repeatedly has said](https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2025-02-20_blumenthal_letter_to_ftc.pdf) he would follow a lawful order, without elaborating. Rohit Chopra, a Democrat who in 2020 was one of the FTC commissioners who approved of the lawsuit, tells WIRED that it’s vital that the trial move forward and that evidence be allowed to see the light of day. “The allegations in the complaint relate to specific conduct, and we had a reason to believe that there is a violation of law,” Chopra says. “I hope it does not result in some cheap settlement that does nothing to fix the issues that we alleged.” Initially, attorneys general representing 50 states and territories [had joined the case](https://www.naag.org/multistate-case/new-york-et-al-v-meta-originally-facebook-inc-no-20-3589-d-d-c/) against the acquisitions—so they could have carried it forward without the FTC. But the attorneys general bowed out after Boasberg ruled they had waited too long to sue. That time restriction, Boasberg decided, didn’t apply to the FTC. The FTC and Meta declined to comment to WIRED. How Would a Sale Even Work? --------------------------- In the event Meta loses the upcoming trial, Boasberg would hear a separate trial on potential remedies. During Trump’s first term, Ian Conner, then the FTC’s director of the bureau of competition, [said in a speech](https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/1565915/conner_gcr_live_conduct_remedies_2-8-20.pdf) that the commission “will seek to unwind a merger when it’s the best way to restore competition.” Meta and the FTC would each have a turn to pitch an ideal sale process—including the level of oversight and control the court would have over the divestiture. A key focus of the discussion would likely be any challenges involved in separating intertwined services. Meta has tried to increase connections among its apps, allowing users to post and communicate between them. “How much beneath the surface are they technically integrated and what would it mean to separate them,” says Andrew Gavil, a legal scholar at Howard University. Investors, employees, and other Instagram and WhatsApp shareholders who cashed in when the startups sold to Facebook need not fret. They won’t have to return the money to turn back the clock on the apps, according to Gavil. “Think of it as forward-looking, not backward looking—\[Instagram and WhatsApp\] would not be restored to what they were when acquired but spun off in some form as they now exist,” he says. Boasberg may be influenced by how Amit Mehta, his fellow Washington, DC district court judge, handles [an antitrust case Google lost last year against the US Department of Justice](https://www.wired.com/story/google-search-antitrust-monopoly-ruling/). A penalties trial is scheduled to begin next month, which could result in Mehta ordering Google [to divest](https://www.wired.com/story/google-search-monopoly-judge-amit-mehta-options/) some of its services such as the Chrome browser. It is rare that a company like Meta would be forced to unwind a completed acquisition. Even [an FTC case](https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/171-0231-otto-bock-healthcare-north-america-inc-matter) involving a prosthetics and orthotics manufacturer that had been moving toward a complete divestiture ultimately resulted in most of the deal staying in place. If Meta loses the upcoming trial and the judge orders a breakup, the court could appoint a trustee to oversee an auction process and vet potential buyers for Instagram and WhatsApp. Meta could have to share some user data and technology with the spunoff units at no cost, and its competing product development efforts could be temporarily paused, according to Gavil. Who’s Expected to Win? ---------------------- It’s difficult to predict without hearing the testimony expected in the coming weeks from current and former Meta executives such as Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg, antitrust experts, and the company’s competitors. Gavil, the Howard University law professor, says the FTC could be considered an underdog. The harms to consumers and advertisers from the acquisitions are fuzzier than would be ideal for an antitrust case, he says. And Boasberg [has been skeptical](https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-ftc-antitrust-non-price-theory/) of some of the commission’s arguments, [even writing last year](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.224921/gov.uscourts.dcd.224921.384.0_2.pdf) that some of “its positions at times strain this country’s creaking antitrust precedents to their limits.” But in the end, he has given the FTC a fighting chance.

Lily Jamali North America technology correspondent•[@lilyjamali](https://twitter.com/lilyjamali) Reporting fromSan Francisco Reuters A trial in the landmark antitrust case against social media giant Meta kicks off in Washington on Monday. The US competition and consumer watchdog alleges that Meta, which already owned Facebook, bought Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 to eliminate competition, effectively giving itself a monopoly. The FTC reviewed and approved those acquisitions but committed to monitor the outcomes. If the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) wins the case it could force Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to sell off both Instagram and WhatsApp. Meta previously said it was sure it would win and experts have told the BBC it is likely to argue that Instagram users have had a better experience since it was taken over. "The \[FTC's\] argument is the acquisition of Instagram was a way of neutralizing this rising competitive threat to Facebook," says Rebecca Haw Allensworth, a professor of antitrust at Vanderbilt Law School. Ms Allensworth says Mr Zuckerberg's own words, including those from his emails, may offer the most convincing evidence at trial. "He said it's better to buy than to compete. It's hard to get more literal than that," Ms Allensworth says. Meta, on the other hand, is likely to argue that intent is not particularly relevant in an antitrust case. "They're going to say the real question is: are consumers better off as a result of this merger?," she said. "They'll put on a lot of evidence that Instagram became what it is today because it benefited from being owned by Facebook." Mr Zuckerberg and the company's former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg are both expected to testify at the trial, which could run for several weeks. Shifting politics ----------------- The case, FTC v Meta, was filed during US President Donald Trump's first administration but risks becoming politicized during his second term. Mr Zuckerberg has lobbied Trump in person to have the FTC drop the case, [according to the Wall Street Journal](https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/meta-antitrust-trial-zuckerberg-lobbying-trump-67c8f3a5). When asked by the BBC to confirm that report, Meta sidestepped the question but said in a statement: "The FTC's lawsuits against Meta defies reality." "More than 10 years after the FTC reviewed and cleared our acquisitions, the commission's action in this case sends the message that no deal is ever truly final," a Meta spokesperson told the BBC. Relations between Mr Zuckerberg and Trump had been [frosty](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c627p8leww1o) partly because Trump was barred from Meta's social media platforms after the US Capitol riot in January 2021. Since then, the relationship has thawed somewhat. Meta [contributed](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8j9e1x9z2xo) $1m (£764,400) to Trump's inaugural fund, and in January [announced](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8j9e1x9z2xo) Ultimate Fighting Championship Fighter (UFC) boss Dana White, a close Trump ally, would join its board of directors. The company also [announced](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly74mpy8klo) in January that it was doing away with independent fact-checkers. 'A very clear message' ---------------------- President Trump's move to fire two FTC commissioners in March also hangs over the case. As Democrats, Rebecca Kelly Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya were in the minority on the five-seat commission. Until Wednesday, just two seats of those seats were filled, both by Republicans. Another Republican was [confirmed](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/04/ftc-chairman-ferguson-congratulates-mark-meador-confirmation-ftc-commissioner) by the Senate on Thursday. Slaughter and Bedoya - who are suing the Trump administration to be reinstated - say the move to push them out was meant to intimidate. "The president sent a very clear signal not only to us but to Chairman Ferguson and Commissioner \[Melissa\] Holyoak that if they do something he doesn't like, he could fire them too," Slaughter told the BBC in a recent interview. "So if they don't want to do a favor for his political allies, they're on the chopping block as well," Slaughter said. Slaughter and Bedoya both expressed alarm at recent reports about Zuckerberg's lobbying efforts. "My hope is that there is no political interference," Mr Bedoya told the BBC. Reuters The FTC did not respond to a request for comment from the BBC. Ferguson, who was appointed as FTC chair by Trump, recently [told](https://www.theverge.com/news/642068/ftc-chair-andrew-ferguson-trump-drop-meta-lawsuit-hypothetical) The Verge he would "obey lawful orders" when asked what he would do if the president directed him to drop a lawsuit like the one against Meta. Ferguson added that he would be very surprised if anything like that ever happened. The FTC is considered a key antitrust watchdog. In recent years, it has returned hundreds of millions of dollars to victims of fraud, in addition to passing laws that ban junk fees and subscription traps. But as the Meta trial begins, it's among the many independent regulatory agencies that the administration seems keen to rein in. Chair Ferguson is also recently [quoted](https://www.theverge.com/news/642068/ftc-chair-andrew-ferguson-trump-drop-meta-lawsuit-hypothetical) reaffirming his belief that independent regulatory bodies are "not good for democracy." The FTC's 'uphill battle' ------------------------- FTC v Meta begins as another major antitrust case - USA v Google - enters what's known as the remedies phase. The Department of Justice won the first phase of that case last summer when Judge Amit Mehta found that Google holds a monopoly in online search, with a market share of around 90%. Last month, the DOJ [reiterated](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/07/technology/trump-google-search-antitrust.html) a demand made during the Biden administration that a court break up Google's search monopoly. The FTC's case against Meta will be tougher to prove, says Laura Phillips-Sawyer, an associate professor of business law at the University of Georgia. "I think they have a real uphill battle," Ms Phillips-Sawyer said of the FTC. "They have a long road before any consideration of divestiture of Instagram or WhatsApp is considered." That's because compared to online search, there's more competition in the personal network services space that Meta operates in, Ms Phillips-Sawyer said. Meta in a statement said the evidence at trial "will show what every 17-year-old in the world knows: Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp compete with Chinese-owned TikTok, YouTube, X, iMessage and many others." 

Seven years ago, Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Meta, [testified for the first time in Congress](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/10/us/politics/zuckerberg-facebook-senate-hearing.html). After a two-week boot camp by his lawyers to prep him, he answered questions in three back-to-back-to-back hearings over two days in a baptism by fire. Mr. Zuckerberg, 40, has had even more practice since then. He has appeared before Congress eight times and testified in court at least twice, more than any of his peers at the biggest tech companies. He has defended his company, previously known as Facebook, on issues such as privacy, [child safety](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/22/technology/zuckerberg-instagram-child-safety-lawsuits.html) and the [spread of disinformation](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/10/28/technology/tech-hearing). As early as Monday, Mr. Zuckerberg will again take the hot seat, this time as the marquee witness in the [Federal Trade Commission’s landmark lawsuit](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/28/technology/ftc-lina-khan-meta.html) accusing Meta of breaking antitrust law. Regulators sued the company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia over its acquisitions [of Instagram](https://archive.nytimes.com/dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/04/09/facebook-buys-instagram-for-1-billion/) and [WhatsApp](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/08/technology/mark-zuckerberg-whatsapp.html), saying it used a “buy-or-bury strategy” to maintain a monopoly in social media. Mr. Zuckerberg’s turn as a serial witness has become a potent symbol of Washington’s growing frustration with the power held by Silicon Valley, fueling attempts to rein in the tech industry. Under President Trump, [tech chief executives have cozied up](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/08/technology/tech-ceos-lobbying-trump.html) to the administration in hopes that regulators will take a softer hand, but so far his appointees have signaled continued scrutiny. On Capitol Hill, lawmakers have railed at Mr. Zuckerberg, accusing him of lying and having personal responsibility for various societal harms. Previous tough questioning could help him during his expected seven hours of testimony defending Meta in the antitrust trial, legal experts said. “He seems to be much more aware of the audiences he’s speaking to compared to his earlier years,” said Adam Sterling, associate dean at Stanford Law School. “Whether it’s a deposition or a lawsuit or in front of the Senate, he can actually craft the message to the recipients of it.” Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and [log into](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fzuckerberg-testifies-meta-trial-ftc.html&asset=opttrunc) your Times account, or [subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fzuckerberg-testifies-meta-trial-ftc.html) for all of The Times. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. Already a subscriber? [Log in](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fzuckerberg-testifies-meta-trial-ftc.html&asset=opttrunc). Want all of The Times? [Subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fzuckerberg-testifies-meta-trial-ftc.html).

Meta Platforms Inc. faces a [historic antitrust trial](https://apnews.com/article/technology-business-lawsuits-federal-trade-commission-facebook-fb2716964e7bcd6dd1e790d7fc65a20b) beginning Monday that could force the tech giant to break off Instagram and WhatsApp, startups it bought more than a decade ago that have since grown into social media powerhouses. The looming antitrust trial will be the first big test of President Donald Trump’s Federal Trade Commission’s ability to challenge Big Tech. The lawsuit was filed against Meta — then called Facebook — in 2020, during Trump's first term. It claims the company bought Instagram and WhatsApp to squash competition and establish an illegal monopoly in the social media market. Meta, the FTC argues, has maintained a monopoly by pursuing CEO Mark Zuckerberg's strategy, "expressed in 2008: ‘It is better to buy than compete.’ True to that maxim, Facebook has systematically tracked potential rivals and acquired companies that it viewed as serious competitive threats." Facebook also enacted policies designed to make it difficult for smaller rivals to enter the market and “neutralize perceived competitive threats,” the FTC says in its complaint, just as the world shifted its attention to mobile devices from desktop computers. “Unable to maintain its monopoly by fairly competing, the company’s executives addressed the existential threat by buying up new innovators that were succeeding where Facebook failed,” the FTC says. Facebook bought Instagram — then a scrappy photo-sharing app with no ads and a small cult following — in 2012. The $1 billion cash and stock purchase price was eye-popping at the time, though the deal's value fell to $750 million after Facebook's stock price dipped following its initial public offering in May 2012. Instagram was the first company Facebook bought and kept running as a separate app. Up until then, Facebook was known for smaller “acqui-hires” — a type of popular Silicon Valley deal in which a company purchases a startup as a way to hire its talented workers, then shuts the acquired company down. Two years later, it did it again with the messaging app WhatsApp, which it [purchased for $22 billion](https://apnews.com/ca-state-wire-135dcb36fc16407699d0a04664a67bfc). WhatsApp and Instagram helped Facebook move its business from desktop computers to mobile devices, and to remain popular with younger generations as rivals like Snapchat (which it also tried, but failed, to buy) and TikTok emerged. However, the FTC has a narrow definition of Meta's competitive market, excluding companies like TikTok, YouTube and Apple's messaging service from being considered rivals to Instagram and WhatsApp. “The FTC already has the difficult task, whether it’s looking at 10 years ago or five years ago or today, of trying to define what is the market we’re talking about in a sufficiently narrow way that it can show Meta has a ton of power in that market,” said Paul Swanson, an antitrust attorney for the law firm Holland & Hart. “And I do think that challenge has gotten harder as the years have gone by and we see more and more potential competitors in social media spaces.” Meta, meanwhile, says the FTC’s lawsuit “defies reality.” “The evidence at trial will show what every 17-year-old in the world knows: Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp compete with Chinese-owned TikTok, YouTube, X, iMessage and many others. More than 10 years after the FTC reviewed and cleared our acquisitions, the Commission’s action in this case sends the message that no deal is ever truly final. Regulators should be supporting American innovation, rather than seeking to break up a great American company and further advantaging China on critical issues like AI," the company said in a statement. In a filing last week, Meta also stressed that the FTC “must prove that Meta has monopoly power in its claimed relevant market now, not at some time in the past." This, experts say, could also prove challenging since more competitors have emerged in the social media space in the years since the company bought WhatsApp and Instagram. Meta's fate will be decided by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who late last year denied Meta's request for a summary judgment and ruled that the case must go to trial. Boasberg “seems to be skeptical” of the FTC's narrow market definition in his rulings to date, Swanson said. He added that the judge also said it is a “fact question," which means he is open to hearing what the FTC and its experts have to say to define that narrow market. While the FTC may face an uphill battle in proving its case, the stakes are high for Meta, whose advertising business could be cut in half if it's forced to spin off Instagram. “Instagram is now Meta’s biggest money maker in the U.S., its most lucrative market, where the app accounts for 50.5% of the company’s ad revenues in 2025. Instagram has also been picking up the slack for Facebook on the user front, particularly among young people, for a long time,” said Emarketer analyst Jasmine Enberg. “The trial also comes as Meta is trying to bring back OG Facebook in an effort to appeal to Gen Z and younger users as they join social media. Social media usage is far more fragmented today than it was in 2012 when Facebook acquired Instagram, and Facebook isn’t where the cool college kids hang out anymore. Meta needs Instagram to continue growing, especially as more advertisers think Instagram-first with their Meta budgets.” But Meta isn't the only technology company in the sights of federal antitrust regulators, Google and Amazon face their own cases. The remedy phase of Google's case is scheduled to begin on April 21. A federal judge declared the search giant an [illegal monopoly](https://apnews.com/article/google-antitrust-search-engine-verdict-apple-319a61f20fb11510097845a30abaefd8) last August. “A big theme here is we are applying 19th-century laws to 21st-century markets. And I think it’s an open question whether the judgment developments to antitrust law can keep up with markets as they are changing — these fluid and dynamic tech markets in particular,” Swanson said. “And this will be a case that speaks directly to that.”

Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Meta, took the witness stand on Monday to defend his social media empire in a [landmark antitrust trial](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/technology/meta-ftc-trial-whatsapp-instagram.html) that could dismantle a company that has transformed how the world connects online. In a packed courthouse in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, lawyers for the Federal Trade Commission presented Mr. Zuckerberg with a binder full of dated emails and internal communications about his acquisition strategy, pushing him to defend his words. The government has contended that Meta illegally cemented a social media monopoly by acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp when they were tiny start-ups, combining them into the same company, which was then known as Facebook. “I view this all as relatively early thinking,” Mr. Zuckerberg said about an email he wrote in February 2012 in which he discussed keeping Instagram going but not adding more features. “In practice, we ended up investing a ton after we acquired it.” Mr. Zuckerberg, who is expected to resume testimony on Tuesday, was [the first witness](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/technology/zuckerberg-testifies-meta-trial-ftc.html) in the trial, Federal Trade Commission v. Meta Platforms. Earlier in the day, the F.T.C. opened its first antitrust trial under the Trump administration by arguing that Meta’s acquisitions were part of a “buy-or-bury strategy.” Ultimately, the purchases coalesced Meta’s power, depriving consumers of other social-networking options and edging out competition, the government said. Meta’s lawyers denied the allegations in opening statements, countering that the company faces plenty of competition from TikTok and other social media platforms. The F.T.C. approved the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp more than a decade ago, and trying to unwind the mergers would set a dangerous precedent, the lawyers added. The trial poses the [most consequential threat](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/technology/zuckerberg-testifies-meta-trial-ftc.html) to the business empire of [Mr. Zuckerberg,](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/07/technology/mark-zuckerberg-meta-free-speech.html) the company’s co-founder. If the government succeeds, the F.T.C. is likely to ask Meta to divest Instagram and WhatsApp, potentially shifting the way that Silicon Valley does business and altering a long pattern in which big tech companies have snapped up younger rivals. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and [log into](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-ftc.html&asset=opttrunc) your Times account, or [subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-ftc.html) for all of The Times. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. Already a subscriber? [Log in](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-ftc.html&asset=opttrunc). Want all of The Times? [Subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-ftc.html).

In 2012, when Facebook’s chief executive, [Mark Zuckerberg](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/30/technology/mark-zuckerberg-meta-trump.html), cut a $1 billion check to [buy the photo-sharing app Instagram](https://archive.nytimes.com/dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/04/09/facebook-buys-instagram-for-1-billion/), most people thought he had lost his marbles. “A billion dollars of money?” [joked](https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/04/11/jon-stewart-on-facebooks-billion-dollar-instagram-purchase-really-lame/) Jon Stewart, then the host of “The Daily Show.” “For a thing that kind of ruins your pictures?” Mr. Stewart called the decision “really lame.” His audience — and much of the rest of the world — agreed that Mr. Zuckerberg had overpaid for an app that highlighted a bunch of photo filters. Two years later, Mr. Zuckerberg opened his wallet again when [Facebook agreed to buy WhatsApp](https://archive.nytimes.com/dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/02/19/facebook-to-buy-messaging-start-up/) for $19 billion. Many Americans had never heard of the messaging app, which was popular internationally but not well known in the United States. No one knew how these deals would turn out. But hindsight, it seems, is 20/20. On Monday, the government [argued](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/technology/meta-antitrust-trial-ftc.html) in [a landmark antitrust trial](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/technology/meta-ftc-trial-whatsapp-instagram.html) that both acquisitions — now considered among the greatest in Silicon Valley history — were the actions of a monopolist guarding his turf. Mr. Zuckerberg, who was called as the first witness in the trial, has previously denied that buying Instagram and WhatsApp hurt competition. Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s chief executive, is set to contend in the company’s antitrust trial that were it not for buying Instagram and WhatsApp, his firm might just be an afterthought in the social media landscape.Credit...Jason Andrew for The New York Times Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and [log into](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fmark-zuckerberg-facebook-instagram-whatsapp.html&asset=opttrunc) your Times account, or [subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fmark-zuckerberg-facebook-instagram-whatsapp.html) for all of The Times. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. Already a subscriber? [Log in](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fmark-zuckerberg-facebook-instagram-whatsapp.html&asset=opttrunc). Want all of The Times? [Subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F14%2Ftechnology%2Fmark-zuckerberg-facebook-instagram-whatsapp.html).

An anonymous reader shares a report: _An attorney for the Federal Trade Commission told a judge that Facebook, fearing the competitive threat of Instagram posted to their social media network, [acquired both as a way to "neutralize" the rival](https://deadline.com/2025/04/facebook-antitrust-trial-trump-1236367769/). "They decided that competition was too hard," the FTC's attorney, Daniel Matheson, said in his opening statement in the government's antitrust case against the Meta Platforms social media empire._ _He argued that with Meta's monopoly in social media, "consumers do not have reasonable alternatives they can turn to," even as satisfaction has declined. At stake is the potential breakup of Facebook-parent Meta, as the government has zeroed in on the 2012 acquisition of Instagram and 2014 purchase of WhatsApp._

[META\-1.69%](https://qz.com/quote/META)[GOOGL+1.87%](https://qz.com/quote/GOOGL)[AAPL+3.79%](https://qz.com/quote/AAPL) Meta’s ([META\-1.69%](https://qz.com/quote/META)) monopoly trial kicked off on Monday, throughout which the Federal Trade Commission will argue that the Facebook owner bought Instagram (in 2012) and WhatsApp (2014) to squash emerging competitive threats to Mark Zuckerberg’s social media empire. The case started during President Donald Trump’s first term, and it carried on under President Joe Biden’s FTC. The regulator accuses Meta of engaging in a “[buy or bury](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/technology/meta-ftc-trial-whatsapp-instagram.html#:~:text=The%20case%20—%20Federal%20Trade%20Commission,argues.)” ploy to eliminate its social networking rivals, while Meta argues that it plays nicely and is just one successful player among several formidable competitors — namely TikTok and YouTube ([GOOGL+1.87%](https://qz.com/quote/GOOGL)). “I think it’s going to be one of the biggest antitrust cases we’ve seen in decades,” said Prasad Krishnamurthy, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who studies financial regulation and antitrust law. Krishnamurthy and several other antitrust and industry experts highlighted the key questions surrounding the antitrust case. Where does Meta allegedly have a monopoly? ------------------------------------------ **“**What the government needs to do is to try to define the market as narrowly as possible,” Krishnamurthy said. In this case, the FTC is arguing that Meta has monopoly power among “[personal social networking services](https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/2021-09-08_redacted_substitute_amended_complaint_ecf_no._82.pdf)” in the U.S. This definition excludes services where people primary watch stuff made by strangers, such as YouTube and TikTok. For its part, Meta believes those companies “should be included, because that’s how consumers are spending their time online,” Krishnamurthy said. But is this an accurate way to sum up Meta’s business? Jasmine Enberg, eMarketer’s vice president and principal analyst, said the FTC’s “personal social networking” categorization is “a very outdated definition for what Meta is, and for what Facebook and Instagram are.” “These platforms have expanded since the acquisitions, and barely resemble what they were back in 2012 or, for Facebook, even earlier,” Enberg added. Meta argued something like this in a statement before the trial, saying “every 17-year-old in the world knows” that its apps “compete with Chinese-owned TikTok, YouTube, X, iMessage ([AAPL+3.79%](https://qz.com/quote/AAPL)) and many others.” **Can the FTC prove monopoly power?** ------------------------------------- If TikTok counts, “then the government’s going to have a really hard time showing a large enough market share to prove monopoly power,” said Rebecca Allensworth, an antitrust law expert and Vanderbilt’s associate dean for research. While Allensworth cautioned that it’s difficult to prejudge this sort of thing, she thinks it’s “plausible that TikTok is not in the market.” While both Facebook and TikTok compete for users’ attention, she said, “I don’t think people think of them as true alternatives — and that’s because Facebook and TikTok do kind of different things.” Something that could help the FTC’s case, Allensworth added, would be Meta’s ability to make its products worse without shedding users. “And that’s kind of what’s happened,” she said. “You know, it’s become less private. There’s a lot of ads. They’ve done a lot to content moderation that people aren’t necessarily happy about.” To successfully make its case, the FTC needs to “prove that the market is worse off as a result of Meta’s actions,” Krishnamurthy said. Meta, meanwhile, will argue that the money it’s pumped into Instagram and WhatApp has made those services bigger and better than they would have otherwise turned out. “I think that’s going to be the back and forth” in this case, Krishnamurthy said. Much of the evidence in this case is “over a decade old, and it consists of the contemporaneous business records” from back when Facebook was considering buying Instagram and WhatsApp, said William Kovacic, a former FTC commissioner who now teaches law at George Washington University. A lot of this stuff is already out. For example, in an email to former Facebook chief financial officer David Ebersman, Zuckerberg once indicated that the company might pursue an acquisition to [neutralize a potential competitor](https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/29/21345723/facebook-instagram-documents-emails-mark-zuckerberg-kevin-systrom-hearing). The FTC may have additional evidence to show that would effectively air Meta’s dirty laundry around its acquisition goals at that time. But, Kovacic said, Meta may argue that, “Whatever you see in our emails from 2012 and 2014, whatever anxiety we might have had about this competitive threat, we ended up developing these capabilities and making them available to consumers in a way that could not have happened otherwise. Kovacic added: “A challenging part of the FTC case is to say, even if consumers have had good experiences, it would have been better” had Meta not gobbled up those apps. There’s a ton of history here, too: “None of the competition authorities that looked at these transactions intervened” back in 2012 and 2014, Kovacic noted. Today, there are tons of different apps with social features competing for users’ eyeballs. But “on the business side of things, it’s still incredibly consolidated toward Meta, particularly if you’re looking at social ad spending alone,” Enberg said. “In 2025, we’re expecting about 72.5% of social ad spending in the U.S. to go directly to meta,” the eMarketer executive said. What would fix things, according to the FTC? -------------------------------------------- “If the government succeeds in the case, which is a big if,” Allensworth said, “then I do think the most likely remedy will be some kind of divestiture or a breakup.” In other words, Meta would be forced to unwind its acquisitions of Instagram, or WhatsApp, or both services. Allensworth added, “I don’t think it’s obvious that \[the FTC is\] going to succeed, but they may very well do so.” As part of the remedy stage, the FTC is expected to make the case that splitting up Meta would make social media better — that competition will help fix issues such as intrusive ads and weak privacy protections. Meta, of course, will argue the opposite. **What about Trump?** --------------------- “It is intriguing to speculate about the impact of Meta’s efforts to develop a more friendly relationship with the White House and its efforts in recent weeks to persuade the White House to use its influence to change the direction of the case or abandon it,” said Kovacic, the former FTC commissioner. But while Meta donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund and curried favor with him by killing its program for professional fact-checkers, the FTC has given no indication that it will back off the case. Asked whether Trump will intervene, Krishnamurthy laughed and said, “I mean, there’s got to be a chance, because he’s very hard to predict.” “Anyone who’s following this knows that Trump can change his mind on a dime,” Krishnamurthy said. He added that he would not be surprised if Trump “weighs in on the case on social media — if he sees that this as a way to garner more attention to himself by commenting on the case and potentially playing a role in shaping it. So I think we’re just going to have to hold on to our seats and see.”

In his second day on the stand in [a landmark antitrust trial](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/technology/meta-antitrust-trial-ftc.html), Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Meta, on Tuesday defended the social media company’s 2012 acquisition of Instagram, describing the transaction as business as usual for a tech company. Businesses weigh the benefits and costs of developing new products themselves against buying start-ups with products they want to add, he said. When Instagram was competing with his company’s now-defunct Camera app, “we were doing a build-vs.-buy analysis,” Mr. Zuckerberg said. “I thought that Instagram was better at that, so I thought it was better to buy them.” Mr. Zuckerberg is the central witness of [the antitrust trial](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/technology/meta-ftc-trial-whatsapp-instagram.html), in which the government accuses Meta of violating competition laws by purchasing WhatsApp and Instagram in a “buy or bury” strategy. He spent more than seven hours answering questions on Monday and Tuesday from lawyers in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia as they tried to make the case that he had viewed the other apps as rivals he needed to take out. The case, Federal Trade Commission v. Meta Platforms, poses a consequential threat to Mr. Zuckerberg’s business, which he co-founded as Facebook in his Harvard dorm room in 2004. The F.T.C. has asked Judge James E. Boasberg, who is presiding, to find the Silicon Valley company guilty of illegally maintaining a social media monopoly. Meta bought Instagram for $1 billion and, two years later in 2014, WhatsApp for $19 billion. If successful, the government is likely to ask the judge to break up Meta by ordering it to sell off the two apps. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and [log into](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F15%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-mark-zuckerberg.html&asset=opttrunc) your Times account, or [subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F15%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-mark-zuckerberg.html) for all of The Times. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. Already a subscriber? [Log in](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F15%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-mark-zuckerberg.html&asset=opttrunc). Want all of The Times? [Subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F15%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-mark-zuckerberg.html).

In 2022, as Facebook’s ([META\-1.69%](https://qz.com/quote/META)) popularity dwindled, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg proposed a “potentially crazy idea” to increase the social media platform’s cultural relevance: purging users’ friend networks and making people start all over again on the platform. This came to light after Zuckerberg took the witness stand Monday amid [a landmark antitrust trial](https://qz.com/meta-antitrust-trial-ftc-instagram-facebook-whatsapp-1851776093) against the company, where various emails have been introduced as evidence, including the one where he proposed his “crazy” idea in an internal email to Meta’s top brass. Zuckerberg was brainstorming ways to reinvigorate Facebook’s user engagement using social graphs (friend networks) and wrote in an email: “Option 1. Double down on Friending. One potentially crazy idea is to consider wiping everyone’s graphs and having them start again.” The proposal was met with skepticism and hesitancy from at least one person inside the company. Tom Alison, who was the head of Facebook at the time, warned Zuckerberg that such a move could disrupt key features of the platform, particularly on Instagram, which is also under Meta’s umbrella. Alison wrote back to Zuckerberg, “I’m not sure Option #1 in your proposal (Double-down on Friending) would be viable given my understanding of how vital the friend use case is to IG.” Zuckerberg responded that he didn’t follow Alison’s concerns and raised another thought: “Do you have a sense of how much work it would be to convert profiles to a follow model?” On the stand Monday, Zuckerberg said Facebook never followed through with his proposal. During his hours of testimony in a Washington, D.C. federal courtroom, Zuckerberg said the social media platform’s primary purpose these days isn’t to connect with friends anymore — Facebook’s feed “has turned into more of a broad discovery and entertainment space,” he said. “The friend part has gone down quite a bit,” Zuckerberg testified. However, in late March, Facebook announced the creation of a “friends tab,” a separate news feed for app users that would show posts shared exclusively by people’s friends and family. In a press release, the company said it was “bringing the magic of friends back to Facebook.” Alison, who is still the head of Facebook, [said to The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/27/technology/meta-facebook-friends-tab.html), “This idea of having a central place of what’s going on with your friends, that was like the magic of the early days of social media. ... We’re making sure that there’s still a place for this stuff on Facebook. It is something that shouldn’t get lost in the modern social media mix.”

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg [considered resetting all Facebook users' friend connections](https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-testify-meta-antitrust-trial-federal-trade-commission-2025-4) to boost the platform's declining relevance, according to internal emails revealed Monday in a landmark FTC antitrust trial. In a 2022 message to executives, Zuckerberg proposed "wiping everyone's graphs and having them start again," referring to users' friend networks. Facebook head Tom Alison questioned the idea's viability, citing Instagram's reliance on friend connections. Zuckerberg later testified that the plan was never implemented and that Facebook has "evolved" from its original purpose. The FTC argues Meta violated competition laws by acquiring Instagram ($1B) and WhatsApp ($19B) as [part of a "buy or bury" strategy](https://tech.slashdot.org/story/25/04/14/1439241/facebook-sought-to-neutralize-competitive-threats-ftc-argues-as-landmark-antitrust-trial-begins) outlined in Zuckerberg's 2008 email stating, "It is better to buy than compete."

Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg took the stand on Monday at a [high-stakes trial in Washington over U.S. antitrust enforcers’ claims](https://www.fastcompany.com/91315583/5-things-to-know-about-metas-upcoming-ftc-trial) that the company spent billions of dollars to acquire Instagram and WhatsApp to fend off Facebook competitors. The FTC is seeking to force Meta to restructure or sell Instagram and WhatsApp, testing President Donald Trump’s promises to take on Big Tech while posing an existential threat to a company that by some estimates earns about half of its U.S. advertising revenue from Instagram. Wearing a dark suit and light blue tie, Zuckerberg calmly responded to questions while seeking to combat allegations Meta bought the companies a decade ago to eliminate competition among social media platforms where users connect with friends and family. Zuckerberg emphasized that friends and family sharing was only one priority for the app along with discovering other content. In fact, a 2018 decision to prioritize Facebook content shared by users’ friends over video posts and other public content failed to grasp a shift toward users sharing that content via messages instead of posting life updates in their feeds, Zuckerberg said. “I think we misunderstood how social engagement online was evolving,” Zuckerberg said. “People just kept on engaging with more and more stuff that wasn’t what their friends were doing,” he said. Expand to continue reading ↓

In a blockbuster antitrust trial that’s just getting underway, the Federal Trade Commission is making its case that Meta ([META\-1.69%](https://qz.com/quote/META)) abused its social-networking dominance as part of a “[buy or bury](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/technology/meta-ftc-trial-whatsapp-instagram.html#:~:text=The%20case%20%E2%80%94%20Federal%20Trade%20Commission,argues.)” strategy to squash emerging threats. There are [several key questions in the FTC’s case](https://qz.com/meta-antitrust-trial-ftc-instagram-facebook-whatsapp-1851776093?_gl=1*12g4vob*_ga*MzUxNzY2NjAwLjE3MjAwMTcyMjA.*_ga_V4QNJTT5L0*MTc0NDczMTM3Ni4yOTAuMS4xNzQ0NzM1OTkxLjYwLjAuMA..) against Facebook’s parent company, including whether Meta is as dominant as regulators say in the TikTok era, and if social media is actually worse off today because of Facebook’s alleged ploy to [neutralize](https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/29/21345723/facebook-instagram-documents-emails-mark-zuckerberg-kevin-systrom-hearing) its competitors. Facebook acquired Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014, and the social networking giant also tried and failed to buy Snapchat ([SNAP\-0.06%](https://qz.com/quote/SNAP)) in 2013, before [copying its marquee feature — stories](https://www.wired.com/story/copycat-how-facebook-tried-to-squash-snapchat/). Earlier still, Facebook tried to buy Twitter, and former CEO Jack Dorsey [reportedly considered the deal](https://techcrunch.com/2013/11/04/the-three-reasons-twitter-didnt-sell-to-facebook/) over fears that Facebook could retaliate by copying it. As the courts turn over these stones and more, just what’s at stake for Mark Zuckerberg’s social media empire if the FTC manages to win? An awful lot, considering that Meta’s market cap is now roughly $1.3 trillion. If the FTC is able to win the case, “I do think the most likely remedy will be some kind of divestiture or a breakup,” Rebecca Allensworth, an antitrust law expert and Vanderbilt University’s associate dean for research, told Quartz. “And so Meta stands to lose Instagram, WhatsApp, or both.” But Allensworth cautioned that this is a big “if.” “I don’t think it’s obvious that they’re going to succeed, but they may very well do so,” she said. So, Meta could be forced to unwind its Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions — but what would that actually mean for its advertising business today? “There’s a lot at stake for Meta; it could lose up to half of its ad business,” said Jasmine Enberg, vice president and principal analyst at eMarketer. The research firm expects Instagram alone to represent 50.5% of Meta’s U.S. ad revenue this year, and a forced sale or spinoff could hold back Meta’s ability to grow later on. “Instagram has been picking up the slack for Facebook on the user front for a long time, especially among young people,” said Enberg. “And while Meta is massive and Facebook is still the largest social platform worldwide,” Meta needs Instagram to keep growing, Enberg added, as Gen Z and younger users “turn to social media for the first time.” Enberg explained that the broader social media landscape has changed drastically since Facebook snapped up Instagram in 2012, when Snapchat had just launched and Tiktok didn’t even exist yet. Today, she said, user behavior is more fragmented, with people turning to many different apps throughout the day. “And,” she added, “the social platforms also compete with non-social players, such as entertainment providers.” While plenty of apps with social features are now tussling for users’ eyeballs, Enberg said, “On the business side of things, it’s still incredibly consolidated toward Meta, particularly if you’re looking at social ad spending alone.” EMarketer projects that 72.5% of all social ad spending in the U.S. will go to Meta in 2025. Much of that has to do with Instagram, but WhatsApp is also a huge asset for Meta. Though the chat app does not host ads, Meta has looked to [business messaging](https://www.emarketer.com/content/meta-looks-diversify-revenue-model-with-new-whatsapp-business-messaging-features) to diversify its revenue, said Enberg. Plus, WhatsApp’s base of several billion users gives Meta “massive reach, as well as some data to help support its ad business,” she added. The high stakes in this case extend well beyond Meta, said Prasad Krishnamurthy, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who studies financial regulation and antitrust law. “The remedy that the government is seeking, which is to break up the company, is a pretty substantial remedy that would change not just the experience for consumers, but it really would change the whole communication ecosystem of our culture,” he said. “I think it’s fair to say \[that\] this is an enormous case.” But will a Meta breakup actually come to pass? In a statement over email, Hightower Advisors’ chief investment strategist Stephanie Link said her “base case is a settlement.” Link added that Meta has already capitulated to President Trump in a number of ways, including by shuttering its professional fact-checking and diversity efforts, and [paying the president $25 million](https://www.npr.org/2025/01/29/nx-s1-5279570/meta-trump-settlement-facebook-instagram-suspensions) after kicking him off Instagram and Facebook. Citing the competition Meta faces from TikTok and [earlier developments in the case](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meta-antitrust-trial-ftc-boasberg/#:~:text=The%20FTC%20initially%20filed%20the,prove%20Facebook%20was%20a%20monopoly.), Link ultimately said she sees “no change to \[Meta’s\] 20% revenue growth and 40% operating margin story. It trades now at 19x forward P/E and has declined 30% from recent highs – which is when I started to buy. And will continue.”

WASHINGTON -- Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg emphasized in federal court on Wednesday that he bought Instagram and WhatsApp because he saw value in the companies — not to take out competitors, as the Federal Trade Commission alleges in a historic [antitrust trial.](https://apnews.com/article/meta-ftc-antitrust-instagram-whatsapp-facebook-f602a09e86c9eb4538949572f72e8380) Zuckerberg took the stand for the third day in the trial, wrapping up his testimony as the first witness Wednesday afternoon. He took questions from Meta attorney Mark Hansen, who has argued that his client hardly has a monopoly in social media, as the FTC claims, and still faces stiff global competition. Hansen focused some of his questioning on emails sent by Zuckerberg and his associates that the FTC cited in earlier testimony to illustrate the Facebook founder's alarm over the growth of Instagram and his sense that he needed to neutralize its threat. Zuckerberg said he’s very focused on inventing new things, and understanding what other people are creating is a big part of the process. At any given point in his company’s history, he said, similar tones of concern could be found in emails about what other companies were doing better than his. “This is my job," Zuckerberg said. "I need to understand what is going on, and I need to push our teams to move quickly” to learn about what is going on in a very competitive market. Hansen questioned Zuckerberg about competition, particularly from TikTok, the popular social media site owned by Beijing-based company ByteDance, and the the growth of the video-sharing platform YouTube, which is owned by Alphabet. Zuckerberg testified that people spend more time on YouTube than on Facebook and Instagram combined. While Hansen noted that the FTC doesn't consider YouTube to be a Meta competitor — because it doesn't have the same friend-sharing technology as Facebook — Zuckerberg said YouTube has built in ways to share videos. The FTC contends Meta has used a monopoly in its technology that facilitates connecting with friends and family to generate enormous profits as consumer satisfaction has dropped. The case could force the tech giant to break off Instagram and WhatsApp, startups it bought more than a decade ago that have since grown into social media powerhouses. Daniel Matheson, the FTC's attorney who questioned Zuckerberg, has repeatedly brought up his own words in emails to associates before and after the acquisition of Instagram to try to show Zuckerberg was more interested halting Instagram's alarming growth than improving the product. Under questioning by Hansen, Zuckerberg insisted that he had no intention of acquiring Instagram only to slow its development and end a threat. He said the focus was on "having it run as an independent brand.” Hansen noted that the FTC is making similar claims about the acquisition of the messaging app WhatsApp: that Zuckerberg was afraid of the company's potential. “It’s something I thought about," Zuckerberg said, noting the app's formidable capabilities, but he added that he later learned not to be worried because the owners didn't share the same vision or direction. He said his interest in buying it was “the usage of it.” “I thought the app was important and valuable,” Zuckerberg said. The trial, which is slated to last weeks, will feature other Big-Tech figures. After Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook's former chief operating officer, took the stand. The trial is one of the first big tests of President Donald Trump’s FTC’s ability to challenge Big Tech. The lawsuit was filed against Meta — then called Facebook — in 2020, during Trump’s first term. It claims the company bought Instagram and WhatsApp to squash competition and establish an illegal monopoly in the social media market. Facebook bought Instagram — which was a photo-sharing app with no ads — for $1 billion in 2012. Instagram was the first company Facebook bought and kept running as a separate app. Until then, Facebook was known for smaller “acqui-hires” — a popular Silicon Valley deal in which a company purchases a startup as a way to hire its talented workers, then shuts the acquired company down. Two years later, it did it again with the messaging app WhatsApp, which it purchased for $22 billion. WhatsApp and Instagram helped Facebook move its business from desktop computers to mobile devices, and to remain popular with younger generations as rivals like Snapchat (which it also tried, but failed, to buy) and TikTok emerged. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg is presiding over the case. Late last year, he denied Meta’s request for a summary judgment and ruled that the case must go to trial.

Sheryl Sandberg, the former chief operating officer of Meta, said in a [landmark antitrust trial](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/technology/meta-antitrust-trial-ftc.html) on Thursday that the social media giant faced strong competition and that it nurtured and grew Instagram after buying the app, countering accusations that the company illegally stifled rivals. In her [second day](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/16/technology/zuckerberg-meta-antitrust-trial.html) on the stand, Ms. Sandberg, who left Meta in 2022, said the company feared the rise of TikTok around 2020 and how the video app’s popularity could eat into Meta’s advertising revenues. In a document presented to the board of directors in 2020, she wrote that TikTok’s ascent could take $3 billion to $6 billion from Meta’s revenue as its users spent less time on its apps, which include Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram. “It’s a big deal,” Ms. Sandberg said in her testimony, referring to Meta executives’ concern for their business at the time. “Wall Street doesn’t particularly like misses of any size, but especially in the billions.” The U.S. government has accused Meta, formerly known as Facebook, of illegally cementing a social media monopoly by buying young rivals such as Instagram for $1 billion in 2012 and WhatsApp for $19 billion in 2014. Meta employed a “buy-or-bury strategy” to consolidate its power, the government has argued. The government plans to seek a breakup of the company if it wins. The case — Federal Trade Commission v. Meta Platforms — has so far hinged on a trove of internal documents in which executives discussed concerns about competition from start-ups. [Mark Zuckerberg](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/technology/zuckerberg-testifies-meta-trial-ftc.html), Meta’s chief executive, spent 10 hours on the stand as the first and marquee witness in the trial, which started on Monday. [Judge James E. Boasberg](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/07/us/politics/trump-judge-boasberg-kavanaugh.html), who will decide the case, is presiding over the trial in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The case may be challenging for the government to win because the Instagram and WhatsApp deals were approved by regulators more than a decade ago. It is also [hard to prove the hypotheticals](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/technology/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-instagram-whatsapp.html) of what might have happened had Meta not bought Instagram and WhatsApp and whether or not they would have been as successful. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and [log into](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F17%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-sheryl-sandberg.html&asset=opttrunc) your Times account, or [subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F17%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-sheryl-sandberg.html) for all of The Times. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. Already a subscriber? [Log in](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F17%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-sheryl-sandberg.html&asset=opttrunc). Want all of The Times? [Subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F17%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-antitrust-trial-sheryl-sandberg.html).

[META\-1.69%](https://qz.com/quote/META)[GOOGL+1.23%](https://qz.com/quote/GOOGL)[MSFT+0.24%](https://qz.com/quote/MSFT)[WBD+0.75%](https://qz.com/quote/WBD)[NWS+0.99%](https://qz.com/quote/NWS) In week one of the Federal Trade Commission’s blockbuster monopoly trial against Meta ([META\-1.69%](https://qz.com/quote/META)), CEO Mark Zuckerberg spent around 10 hours on the stand as the agency questioned him about revealing emails from another era. This trial is only just getting started. Throughout it, the FTC will argue that Facebook [engaged in a “buy or bury” ploy](https://qz.com/meta-antitrust-trial-ftc-instagram-facebook-whatsapp-1851776093?_gl=1*13dp67g*_ga*MzUxNzY2NjAwLjE3MjAwMTcyMjA.*_ga_V4QNJTT5L0*MTc0NDk5NTE5My4yOTYuMS4xNzQ0OTk4ODUxLjQxLjAuMA..) to eliminate its rivals and gain monopoly power in the social media market. Meanwhile, Meta will make the case that it is responsible for its acquisitions’ runaway successes — and that even after buying Instagram (in 2012) and WhatsApp (in 2014), Meta still faces formidable competition from the likes of TikTok and YouTube ([GOOGL+1.23%](https://qz.com/quote/GOOGL)). At stake is Zuckerberg’s $1.27 trillion social media empire; [if the FTC gets its way](https://qz.com/meta-ftc-antitrust-trial-zuckerberg-whatsapp-instagram-1851776249), Meta will be forced to give up Instagram and WhatsApp, eliminating “up to half of its ad business,” Jasmine Enberg, vice president and principal analyst at eMarketer, told Quartz earlier this week. The research firm expects Instagram alone to represent 50.5% of Meta’s U.S. ad revenue this year. Instagram and WhatsApp are both critical to Meta’s continued growth as legacy social app Facebook loses momentum with young people. Read on for a look at some of the key takeaways from the trial’s first week, including Zuckerberg’s old emails and the price Meta reportedly tried to pay to avoid the trial altogether. **Is Meta a monopoly today?** ----------------------------- “The FTC kicked off the case with the biggest witness on its list. Only one other witness, the FTC’s economics expert Scott Hemphill, is slated to spend anywhere near as long on the stand as Mr. Zuckerberg,” Holland & Hart antitrust attorney Paul Swanson said in an email to Quartz. “Yet while the FTC confronted Mr. Zuckerberg with cringeworthy emails about Facebook’s schemes to beat back competition in the 2010s, none of that hit the key question: Is Meta currently maintaining a monopoly by virtue of the Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions?” According to Swanson, the agency didn’t get the “critical testimony it needs to show that Meta dominates a narrow market that excludes other social media platforms like TikTok and LinkedIn ([MSFT+0.24%](https://qz.com/quote/MSFT)).” Swanson added, “Mr. Zuckerberg deftly described a market in which Meta’s power is checked by competition from those companies.” In one example, Zuckerberg argued on the stand that Meta’s “growth slowed down dramatically” due to the rise of TikTok. In another comment, he [said](https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/16/tech/mark-zuckerberg-testimony-meta-ftc-trial/index.html) he thinks “people spend more time on YouTube than on Facebook and Instagram combined, certainly more than either one independently.” Zuckerberg saw this coming in 2018 ---------------------------------- The FTC brought in [old emails](https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/16/tech/mark-zuckerberg-testimony-meta-ftc-trial/index.html) sent by the Meta CEO, and in one message Zuckerberg floated the idea of spinning off Instagram. He wrote at the time, “As calls to break up the big tech companies grow, there is a non-trivial chance that we will be forced to spin out Instagram and perhaps WhatsApp in the next 5-10 years anyway.” Zuckerberg [added](https://www.theverge.com/policy/649213/mark-zuckerberg-meta-instagram-spin-off-ftc-antitrust-trial), “While most companies resist break-ups, the corporate history is that most companies actually perform better after they’ve been split up.” These comments contrast Meta’s extensive efforts to keep its “family of apps” together under one proverbial roof. Meta viewed WhatsApp and Instagram as threats --------------------------------------------- The FTC brought in [other Zuckerberg emails](https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/16/tech/mark-zuckerberg-testimony-meta-ftc-trial/index.html) as evidence, including a 2011 message that called Instagram a “large and viable competitor to us on mobile photos” and a 2012 message that critiqued the teams led by Facebook’s chief tech officer at the time, Mike Schroepfer. “Messenger isn’t beating WhatsApp, Instagram was growing so much faster than us that we had to buy them for $1 billion,” Zuckerberg said. “That’s not exactly killing it,” he added, per a CNN ([WBD+0.75%](https://qz.com/quote/WBD)) report. The following year, Facebook’s current chief operating officer, Javier Olivan, shared concerns with Zuckerberg about WhatsApp’s growth. Messages presented in court, according to [The Hill](https://thehill.com/business/5250102-ftc-grills-zuckerberg-over-emails-from-instagram-whatsapp-acquisitions/), show that Olivan told Zuckerberg that he’d “been thinking hard about this for the past couple of sleepless nights since I am really worried … these guys are the real deal,” he said. Zuckerberg was [reportedly](https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/16/tech/mark-zuckerberg-testimony-meta-ftc-trial/index.html) worried at the time that WhatsApp could offer features similar to Facebook and “start winning in the U.S. and other markets.” Rebecca Allensworth, an antitrust law expert and Vanderbilt’s associate dean for research, told Quartz on Thursday: “So far, the government has done a good job using Zuckerberg’s own words against him, and he has done a good job deflecting them to the degree possible.” “But there is only so much Zuckerberg can do now to walk back on what he said then,” Allensworth added. “These are the worst facts of the case from Meta’s perspective, and the government laid some important blows.” Meta’s moat ----------- Sheryl Sandberg, Meta’s former chief operating officer, also took the stand this week. There, the FTC confronted Sandberg about a message she sent in 2011, when Google debuted its now-defunct Facebook clone. Remarking on Google+, she reportedly told staffers that “the most important thing to acknowledge is that for the first time we have real competition and consumers have real choice.” About a year later, Sandberg said she “would block Google” from advertising its rival on Facebook, according to court evidence published by [Bloomberg](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-16/sandberg-challenged-over-meta-business-moves-during-ftc-trial?embedded-checkout=true). Sandberg argued that these messages weren’t about putting its rivals at a disadvantage. “I said that to rally the troops,” she countered. Zuckerberg’s “crazy idea” to make Facebook relevant --------------------------------------------------- Lots of interesting bits surfaced this week. In 2022, for example, Zuckerberg floated purging users’ friend lists as [a “potentially crazy idea” to breathe some life into Facebook](https://qz.com/mark-zuckerberg-idea-facebook-meta-antitrust-trial-1851776203), according to evidence presented in the trial. Zuckerberg reasoned at the time that “wiping everyone’s graphs and having them start again” could reinvigorate engagement on the service, but it never came to pass. **Meta reportedly tried to fork over $1 billion to settle** ----------------------------------------------------------- In a call to the FTC’s chair Andrew Ferguson, Zuckerberg tried to convince the agency to settle its antitrust case for $450 million — and later $1 billion, according to a report from the [Wall Street Journal](https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/mark-zuckerberg-meta-antitrust-ftc-negotiations-a53b3382). The FTC, meanwhile, was looking for a settlement worth 30 times as much, per the Journal. Look out for expert testimony ----------------------------- Going forward, “the big thing I’m looking for is some expert testimony on what is the right way to think about the market here and Meta’s alleged monopoly power,” Allensworth said. “So far, on that front, we only have testimony by executives at Meta and potential other competitor (like YouTube) about their perceptions of whether Meta faces meaningful competition from social media companies that are not ‘personal,’ like TikTok and YouTube.” Allensworth added, “Judges tend to put a lot of stock in expert opinion in antitrust cases, especially when it comes to market definition and monopoly power.”

An anonymous reader shares a report: _Kevin Systrom, the co-founder of Instagram, testified on Tuesday in a landmark federal antitrust trial that he left Meta in 2018 because his [company was denied resources](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/22/technology/meta-trial-instagram-kevin-systrom.html). The government has argued that Meta purchased Instagram in 2012 as part of a "buy-or-bury strategy" to illegally cement its social media monopoly by killing off its rivals. Last week, current and former Meta executives testified that the social media giant, formerly known as Facebook, used its deep pockets to invest in Instagram after its purchase. In testimony at the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia, Mr. Systrom painted a different picture, saying he left Meta because Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive, wasn't investing enough. At that time, Instagram had grown to 1 billion users, about 40 percent of Facebook's size, yet the photo-sharing app had only 1,000 employees compared to 35,000 employees at Facebook, he said. "We were by far the fastest growing team. We produced the most revenue and relative to what we should have been at the time, I felt like we should have been much larger," said Mr. Systrom, who is expected to testify for six hours._ _Mr. Systrom said he found the decisions baffling. When asked by an F.T.C. lawyer why Mr. Zuckerberg might have decided to give Instagram fewer resources, Mr. Systrom said it was a consistent pattern during his tenure at Meta. "Mark was not investing in Instagram because he believed we were a threat to their growth," he said, referring to Mr. Zuckerberg's prioritization of Facebook._

The most telling moment of the [U.S. antitrust trial against Meta](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/technology/meta-ftc-trial-whatsapp-instagram.html) so far came halfway through [more than 10 hours of testimony](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/15/technology/meta-antitrust-trial-mark-zuckerberg.html) from Mark Zuckerberg, the company’s chief executive. On the witness stand last week, Mr. Zuckerberg, who founded Facebook and later renamed his company [Meta](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/28/technology/facebook-meta-name-change.html), was asked by government lawyers to watch a seven-minute video of an interview he gave at a tech conference more than a decade ago. With his brow furrowed and eyes scrunched, the 40-year-old tech billionaire watched his 28-year-old self describe how the world of 2012 had “really underestimated” his company. Back then, smartphones were a burgeoning computing platform rather than the dominant one. Facebook was still primarily used on desktop computers, and Mr. Zuckerberg’s social network was at risk of losing users to a flurry of start-ups. The older Mr. Zuckerberg occasionally winced as he watched his younger self on video discuss some of his early competitive concerns, such as the potential for [Dropbox](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/technology/dropbox-chief-poster-child-tech-founder-making-it-big.html), a file-sharing company, to become a rival in photo sharing. In hindsight, he said on the stand, it was “pretty ridiculous” to think that Dropbox would compete with Facebook. It was, in short, a reminder of a very different era — an age of social apps, Silicon Valley hubris and Ivy League-educated entrepreneurs, which Meta’s antitrust trial has plunged people back into, in a courtroom in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. At issue in the landmark case is what could have happened if Mr. Zuckerberg had never made two key deals, buying Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014, and whether he quashed competition with the acquisitions. Sitting in Judge James E. Boasberg’s courtroom for the first two weeks of testimony has been like entering a time warp. Executives who have long since left Meta — including [Sheryl Sandberg](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/17/technology/meta-antitrust-trial-sheryl-sandberg.html), Mr. Zuckerberg’s former second-in-command, and [Kevin Systrom](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/22/technology/meta-trial-instagram-kevin-systrom.html), a founder of Instagram — are main witnesses. Lawyers have dredged up emails that date back more than a decade. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and [log into](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F23%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-trial-silicon-valley-social-apps.html&asset=opttrunc) your Times account, or [subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F23%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-trial-silicon-valley-social-apps.html) for all of The Times. Thank you for your patience while we verify access. Already a subscriber? [Log in](https://myaccount.nytimes.com/auth/login?response_type=cookie&client_id=vi&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F23%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-trial-silicon-valley-social-apps.html&asset=opttrunc). Want all of The Times? [Subscribe](https://www.nytimes.com/subscription?campaignId=89WYR&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2025%2F04%2F23%2Ftechnology%2Fmeta-trial-silicon-valley-social-apps.html).