2 weeks Ago By Firstpost
A trial in a landmark antitrust case against social media giant Meta commenced in Washington on Monday. What makes the case significant is the fact that the trial could force Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to sell the famous photo and video-sharing app Instagram. The case was filed by the US Competition and Consumer watchdog, alleging that Meta, which already owned Facebook, bought Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 to eliminate competition, effectively gaining itself a monopoly.
The acquisitions of the two apps were reviewed and approved by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC). However, the body was tasked with monitoring the outcome of the acquisition. According to BBC , if FTC wins the case and proves that Meta has a monopoly in the market, it could force Zuckerberg to sell off both Instagram and WhatsApp.
In the past, Meta has maintained that it was sure it would win the case. Meanwhile, experts told BBC that the company 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.
Allensworth said 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,” she pointed out.
It is important to note that Zuckerberg and the company’s former chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, are both expected to testify at the trial, which could go on for several weeks. Interestingly, the FTC v Meta case was filed during US President Donald Trump’s first stint in the White House. However, the way things are going in the second term, the case has the potential to be politicised.
According to a report by The Wall Street Journal , Zuckerberg lobbied Trump in person to have the FTC drop the case. When asked by BBC for confirmation, Meta sidestepped the question. “The FTC’s lawsuits against Meta defies reality,” the social media giant said in a statement.
“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 British news outlet. During Trump’s first term in the Oval Office, ties between Zuckerberg and the Republican firebrand were frosty partly because Trump was barred from Meta’s social media platforms after the US Capitol riot in January 2021. However, things have changed since then.
Meta contributed $1m (£764,400) to Trump’s inaugural fund, and in January announced Ultimate Fighting Championship Fighter (UFC) boss Dana White, a close Trump ally, would join its board of directors.' Not only this, the company also announced in January that it was doing away with independent fact-checkers , drawing backlash from Democrats and other anti-Trump groups. There was reciprocation from Trump as well.
In March this year, the president moved to fire two FTC commissioners. Democrats, Rebecca Kelly Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya were already 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 by the Senate on Thursday. In light of this, Slaughter and Bedoya filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration to be reinstated. They argued that the move to push them out was meant to intimidate them.
“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 favour for his political allies, they’re on the chopping block as well,” she added. Both lawmakers raised alarm about Zuckerberg’s lobbying efforts.
“I hope that there is no political interference,” Bedoya told BBC ..
