Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg took the stand Monday in Washington, defending the company’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp in a trial that could reshape the entire social media industry.
The FTC wants Meta broken up, accusing it of buying Instagram (2012) and WhatsApp (2014) to eliminate competition, not improve user experience.
If the FTC wins, Meta could be forced to divest Instagram or WhatsApp, threatening its $160B+ ad-driven business and setting a precedent that could ripple across Big Tech.
This case was first filed in 2020 — and now, five years later, the stakes have never been higher.
Zuckerberg’s Emails Take Center Stage
The FTC led with internal communications from Zuckerberg that painted a picture of panic and strategic acquisition.
📩 2011:
“Instagram seems like it’s growing quickly.”
📩 2012:
“We’re so far behind that we don’t even understand how far behind we are… I worry that it will take us too long to catch up.”
📩 2012 memo:
“It’s better to buy than to compete.”
📩 Instagram acquisition rationale:
“Instagram has become a large and viable competitor to us on mobile photos, which will increasingly be the future of photos.”
📩 On the deal strategy:
“Neutralizing a potential competitor.”
FTC attorney Daniel Matheson called that memo “a smoking gun.”
His argument: Meta didn’t out-innovate competitors — it bought them to kill the threat.
Zuckerberg Responds on the Stand
Zuckerberg defended the acquisitions with a calm tone and clear framing:
“These were relatively early conversations.”
“I wanted to buy Instagram because of its camera technology, not because of its social network.”
“Meta has improved Instagram over the years.”
He also addressed Meta’s broader product evolution:
“The ‘friend’ part has gone down quite a bit, but it’s still something we care about.”
“Messaging is symbiotic to the broader platform — it helps users share what they find and stay connected.”
When pressed on a 2022 internal exchange where Meta discussed declining relevance compared to TikTok, Zuckerberg conceded:
“That’s generally a good summary.”
FTC: Meta Bought to Kill. Meta: We Bought to Build.
FTC lawyer Matheson argued in his opening:
“They decided competition was too hard and it would be easier to buy out their rivals than to compete with them.”
Meta’s legal team responded forcefully. Attorney Mark Hansen said:
“Acquisitions to improve and grow have never been found unlawful — and they should not be found unlawful here.”
Meta also reminded the court:
The FTC approved both acquisitions at the time — and regulators can’t rewrite the rules a decade later.
What’s at Stake for Meta?
- Meta claims 3.3 billion daily users across Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Messenger.
- Instagram alone is projected to deliver over 50% of Meta’s U.S. ad revenue in 2025 (eMarketer).
- A forced spinoff could break the cross-platform data model Meta relies on to sell ads — and crush its edge in digital marketing.
Redefining the Market: Messaging, Interests, and Relevance
The trial hinges in part on how the market is defined:
- FTC says Meta dominates social networking — not just because it’s big, but because users have no viable alternatives.
- Meta says the opposite:
TikTok, X, YouTube, Snapchat, and iMessage all compete fiercely for attention and engagement.
FTC lawyers pushed Zuckerberg on Facebook’s shift from “connecting friends” to “interest-based discovery.”
Zuckerberg said:
“It’s the case that over time, the ‘interest’ part of that has gotten built out more than the ‘friend’ part.”
He argued that messaging is integral to Meta’s platforms and a major way people share content.
Trump, Lobbying, and Political Pressure
The case is playing out amid Meta’s renewed ties with the Trump administration:
- Meta contributed $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund
- UFC’s Dana White and Trump ally Dina Powell McCormick have joined Meta’s board
- Meta paid Trump $25 million to settle a lawsuit over his platform bans
- Meta also rolled back its fact-checking program in January
- Zuckerberg has reportedly lobbied Trump directly to drop the FTC case
Meta sidestepped questions about that lobbying, saying only:
“The FTC’s lawsuits against Meta defy reality.”
Finblog Takeaway:
Meta’s defense is simple: “We didn’t kill competition — we built better products.”
The FTC’s case is that Meta used its power to block challengers before they became threats.
Zuckerberg is calm. The emails aren’t. Meta’s empire is huge. The legal precedent? Even bigger.
If the FTC wins, the fallout won’t stop at Menlo Park.
It could redefine how Big Tech grows — and how regulators roll back the past.
The trial will run through the summer. Day 2 of Zuckerberg’s testimony continues Tuesday.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
Related:
Dark colors make products seem more effective
NATO Taps Palantir to Power AI-Driven Warfare Platform
A Decade Later, Meta Is Back on Trial
China Chokes Rare Earth Exports — US Supply Chains Face Major Shock
Tariffs on Phones and Microchips Will Return — Electronics Exemption Only Temporary
90 Deals in 90 Days?: Experts say good luck with that
China strikes back with 125% tariffs on U.S. goods, starting April 12
Tesla stops taking new orders in China
145% Tariffs and a Global Showdown: China Rejects US “Arrogance”
EU to impose retaliatory 25% tariffs on US goods from almonds to yachts
