Meta Platforms CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, took the stand on Monday in a high-profile antitrust trial in Washington, D.C., defending his company’s controversial acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp. The case, brought by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), alleges that Meta’s takeover of the platforms was a deliberate move to neutralise emerging competition and cement its dominance in the social media space.
The FTC is seeking a court order that could potentially force Meta to divest from Instagram and WhatsApp—two of its most significant acquisitions—to restore what it claims is lost competition in the market.
Countering Monopoly Allegations
Zuckerberg firmly denied that the acquisitions were designed to eliminate rivals, maintaining that Meta’s purchase of Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 aimed to strengthen its service offerings in a rapidly evolving digital landscape.
He argued that the integration of these platforms had not hindered competition or harmed users, stating that their evolution was driven by broader shifts in user behaviour and technological trends.
During his testimony, Zuckerberg admitted that Meta may have misjudged key changes in how people use social platforms, particularly around 2018. At the time, Facebook prioritised content shared by friends and family over videos and public posts—a decision that, in hindsight, did not align with users’ growing preference for private messaging and interest-based content discovery.
“I think we misunderstood how social engagement online was evolving,” he acknowledged. “People just kept on engaging with more and more stuff that wasn’t what their friends were doing.”
He added that content from friends now makes up approximately 20% of what users see on Facebook and 10% on Instagram—down from earlier levels—reflecting wider trends in online engagement.
Meta’s Competitive Landscape
Meta’s defence rests on the argument that the social media market has become increasingly competitive, citing the rise of platforms such as TikTok, Google’s YouTube, and Apple’s iMessage.
The FTC, however, contends that Instagram and WhatsApp were acquired specifically to remove competitive threats, citing internal communications from Zuckerberg that suggested Instagram could become a dangerous rival. WhatsApp, the FTC argues, posed a similar risk, with the potential to grow into a major social networking service.
Meta refuted these assertions, pointing to current market dynamics. It highlighted a surge in user traffic to Facebook and Instagram during TikTok’s temporary suspension in January 2023 as evidence of healthy competition between platforms.
The FTC’s Challenge
The FTC maintains that Meta holds a monopoly in the market for platforms where users share content with friends and family, naming Snapchat and MeWe as the only meaningful competitors in this niche. It argues that platforms such as TikTok and YouTube serve a different function, catering to content sharing with wider, often anonymous audiences based on interests rather than personal relationships.
Despite the FTC’s position, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg has noted the Commission faces considerable legal hurdles in proving that Meta’s acquisitions have substantially harmed competition.
The trial, which is expected to run into July, could mark a major turning point for Big Tech regulation. Even if the FTC prevails, it must then demonstrate that forcing Meta to unwind its acquisitions would effectively restore competition.
Potential Consequences
Should Meta be ordered to divest from Instagram or WhatsApp, the financial consequences would be considerable. Instagram is a cornerstone of Meta’s advertising revenue strategy, while WhatsApp—boasting the company’s largest daily user base—is integral to its future business messaging and monetisation ambitions.
This legal battle forms part of a wider push by U.S. authorities to hold tech giants accountable for perceived anti-competitive conduct. Although scrutiny of Silicon Valley intensified under President Donald Trump’s administration, the momentum has continued, with ongoing lawsuits against Meta, Google, Apple, and Amazon.
Meta has previously made efforts to align with the Trump administration, including rolling back certain content moderation practices and contributing to his inauguration fund. However, such efforts have not insulated the company from intensifying regulatory pressure.