The Federal Trade Commission’s high-profile antitrust case against Meta has officially kicked off, with Mark Zuckerberg taking the stand as the first witness. The trial marks one of the boldest federal attempts to break up a tech giant since the AT&T case over 40 years ago, raising crucial questions about how market competition is defined in the digital age.
Zuckerberg’s courtroom appearance is drawing attention—not just for its rarity, but because this case challenges the foundations of Meta’s business model. Although cameras aren’t permitted in federal court, the gravity of the moment is undeniable.
The case, originally filed during Donald Trump’s presidency and continued under Joe Biden’s administration, targets Meta’s acquisition strategy, particularly its purchases of Instagram and WhatsApp when both were emerging platforms. This legal battle has been brewing for years and is now unfolding in a federal courtroom in Washington.
Interestingly, Trump had long viewed Facebook as a societal threat—he even cited it to justify shifting his stance on banning TikTok. Despite that, since his second-term win, Zuckerberg has been working to warm up relations with the administration, reportedly donating $1 million to the president’s inauguration. That outreach, however, hasn’t deterred the lawsuit.
Sources suggest that Zuckerberg recently asked Trump about the possibility of dropping the case, but the effort appears to have been fruitless.
At the heart of the FTC’s argument is Zuckerberg’s past strategy to absorb rising competition, as revealed through internal emails and messages. During his testimony, he defended Meta’s evolution from a friends-and-family platform to one increasingly driven by interest-based content through its algorithmic feed.
“The ‘interest’ part has grown more than the ‘friend’ part,” Zuckerberg acknowledged. “The ‘friend’ part has gone down quite a bit, but it’s still something we care about.”
The FTC’s legal team pointed to internal Meta messages that reveal concern over Instagram’s rapid growth in mobile photography. “We really need to get our act together quickly on this,” Zuckerberg wrote in one email. In another, he called Instagram’s expansion “really scary” and floated the idea of acquiring it to neutralize a threat.
Meta ended up purchasing Instagram for $1 billion in 2012, followed by a $19 billion acquisition of WhatsApp two years later. These decisions, now under scrutiny, are central to the FTC’s claim that Meta deliberately stifled competition.
Zuckerberg also pitched to Facebook executive Tom Alison an idea to reignite user connections by rebooting the friend graph entirely. Alison, however, pushed back, doubting whether such a strategy could work for Instagram.
The trial also revisits Zuckerberg’s past bets, including his once-strong belief in virtual reality’s potential. But now, his argument centers on the notion that Meta competes broadly in the entertainment space — with platforms like X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, YouTube, and even streaming services like Netflix and HBO Max.
Despite Meta’s dominance, especially with 4 billion monthly active users, Zuckerberg emphasized that today’s tech ecosystem is saturated with rivals, all vying for consumer attention. He noted that Meta hasn’t excelled in some modern areas, like group chats — with Instagram being a partial exception.
While critics may question his decisions, Zuckerberg now positions Meta as a player in a highly competitive market. And in this trial, it’s up to the court to determine whether that argument holds water.
Stay ahead in tech — for more updates on the Meta trial and the biggest stories shaping the future of social media, visit our website.
Disclaimer: This news piece has been recreated for informational purposes only. All names, details, and references remain the property of their respective owners. The content does not reflect any official statement or position from Meta Platforms Inc., the FTC, or any affiliated parties.
