The Federal Trade Commission’s antitrust case against Meta kicks off on Monday in a Washington, DC courtroom. The case forms the culmination of a nearly six-year investigation into whether the social media giant broke competition laws when it acquired Instagram and WhatsApp.
At stake is the future of Meta’s enormous advertising business as well as the possibility of being forced to spin off its hugely popular services into separate companies.
Lawyers representing the FTC and Meta will deliver their opening statements on Monday in front of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg in a trial expected to last seven to eight weeks.
A massive trove of evidence and numerous witnesses will be put under scrutiny during this critical trial. The government plans to call key figures to the witness stand, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg, former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg, and Instagram head Adam Mosseri.
The FTC’s case against Meta focuses on several key allegations. The agency argues that Meta’s acquisition of Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 was part of a strategy designed to eliminate competition and maintain monopoly power over the social media market.
According to the government, Meta employed a “buy or bury” strategy to take over competitors it considered threats, leading the company to either absorb rivals or force them out of business altogether. The FTC argues that this behavior violates federal antitrust laws.
The government is seeking a remedy to restore competition to the social media landscape by forcing Meta to divest Instagram and WhatsApp. By unwinding those acquisitions, the FTC believes that smaller social media companies would be able to compete more effectively for consumers and ad revenues, thereby loosening Meta’s hold on the industry.
In response, Meta maintains that it is being penalized for its status as an innovative and aggressive technology company. According to Meta’s lawyers, the firm has always competed fairly, alleging that regulators are punishing its successful trajectory.
The defense points out that both acquisitions were approved by regulators more than a decade ago, arguing that it is misguided to revisit those decisions. Meta contends that the social media landscape has drastically changed since 2012 and 2014.
The company asserts that today it faces significant competition from platforms such as Elon Musk’s X, TikTok, Snapchat, and others. In a statement prior to the opening statements, Meta emphasized, “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.”
Meta also argues that more than 10 years after the FTC reviewed and cleared its acquisitions, the current action sends a troubling message that no deal is ever truly final.
If the FTC is successful in forcing Meta to break up, the implications for users of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp could be considerable. The FTC claims that increased competition among social media startups would lead to better services for users.
Government lawyers argue that, partly due to its dominant market position, the quality of Meta’s services has declined over the years. More competitors in the social media space, they contend, would enhance the quality of available applications for consumers.
Moreover, regulators assert that Meta’s privacy protections have lapsed as a consequence of its alleged monopolistic power. The FTC holds that a break-up would result in improved social media apps for everyone.
Conversely, Meta argues that breaking up its services would render each app less integrated and thus provide a lower-quality experience for consumers.
Turning to the politics surrounding the case, the relationship between CEO Mark Zuckerberg and former President Trump adds another layer to the complexities of the trial. The case began during Trump’s first term in December 2020, amidst a bitter rivalry, although the dynamics have shifted in recent times.
Before the November election, Trump threatened to imprison Zuckerberg, accusing him of actions detrimental to his campaign. Zuckerberg has since made gestures to foster goodwill with Trump and his administration.
The CEO has praised the former president, donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural committee, and has made corporate adjustments aligned with Trump’s priorities, such as discontinuing Facebook and Instagram’s fact-checking program.
Zuckerberg’s visits to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club have also fueled speculation regarding the trial’s trajectory. Although some conjecture exists that Trump could opt to settle with Meta, current signals indicate that the case will unfold over several weeks.
It is worth noting that the possibility of a settlement does remain, even once the trial begins, although it remains unlikely given the current circumstances.
image source from：https://www.npr.org/2025/04/13/nx-s1-5358434/ftc-meta-antitrust-trial
