The FTC's legal action against Meta claims the company maintains a social networking monopoly through anticompetitive practices. Initially dismissed by a federal judge due to lack of evidence, the FTC refiled its case, which is now set for trial. Critics argue the FTC's approach misrepresents the social media landscape, emphasizing that Meta has successfully improved Instagram and WhatsApp through substantial investments. Furthermore, it is contended that the FTC's proposed market definition inaccurately excludes major competitors like TikTok and YouTube, thus underestimating Meta's actual market share.
In order for the FTC to win this case, they need to prove both that Meta has a dominant share in a properly defined product market that includes all competitors, and that the two acquisitions harmed competition and consumers. They are wrong on both claims.
The FTC's case ignores how the market actually works and chases a theory that doesn't hold up in the real world. Instagram and WhatsApp provide a model for what successful acquisitions can achieve.
Collection
[
|
...
]