Meta is trying to get its antitrust case thrown out in the middle of the trial

Engadget - May 16th, 2025

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has concluded its testimony in the significant antitrust case against Meta, which has seen a series of top executives, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg, testify. As the trial progresses, Meta's legal team is pursuing a bold strategy by filing a motion to have the case dismissed entirely. They argue that the FTC has failed to demonstrate that Meta's actions have been anticompetitive, pointing to the success and widespread use of Instagram and WhatsApp as evidence of healthy competition and innovation driven by Meta's investments.

Meta's motion highlights a core argument that the FTC has not substantiated its claims of a lack of competition in the personal social networking sector, focusing on competitors like Snapchat and the smaller, privacy-oriented MeWe. The outcome of this trial could have significant implications for Meta's business operations and the broader tech industry, as it explores the balance between growth through acquisition and maintaining competitive market practices. This case also sheds light on the regulatory landscape surrounding major tech companies and their influence on digital communication platforms.

Meta Ftc Instagram Whats App Mark Zuckerberg Antitrust Social Networking Snapchat Me We

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.8

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The news story provides a timely and relevant overview of the FTC's antitrust case against Meta, focusing on the company's motion to dismiss the case. It accurately captures the main events and arguments, though it could benefit from more detailed source attribution and context about the legal proceedings. The article presents both sides of the dispute, but leans slightly towards Meta's perspective by emphasizing the company's defense. It is clear and accessible to a general audience, making it a valuable piece for those interested in tech industry regulation. Overall, the story is informative and engages with a significant public interest issue, though it could enhance its impact with deeper analysis and transparency.

Accuracy

The news story accurately reports on the FTC's antitrust case against Meta, including the company's motion to dismiss the case. The claim that the FTC has rested its case and that Meta is seeking a dismissal is consistent with available information. However, the story could benefit from more precise details about the FTC's specific allegations and the legal standards for antitrust violations. The inclusion of executives' testimonies aligns with the trial's proceedings, although more context on what these testimonies revealed would enhance accuracy.

Balance

The article presents both Meta's and the FTC's perspectives, detailing Meta's defense and the FTC's allegations. However, it leans slightly towards Meta's viewpoint by focusing more on the company's arguments and less on the FTC's evidence or counterarguments. Including more information on the FTC's rationale and the broader implications of the case would provide a more balanced view.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and well-structured, with a logical flow that guides the reader through the main events of the trial. It uses straightforward language and avoids technical jargon, making it accessible to a general audience. However, some areas could benefit from additional context to enhance comprehension, particularly regarding the legal implications of the case.

Source quality

The article does not cite specific sources or documents directly, such as court filings or official statements from the FTC or Meta. While it references testimony from Meta executives, it lacks direct quotes or attribution to specific sources. The reliance on unnamed sources or general references could impact the perceived credibility and reliability of the information presented.

Transparency

The article provides a basic overview of the case but lacks detailed context about the legal proceedings and the basis for the FTC's claims. It does not disclose its sources or the methodology used to gather information. Greater transparency about the sources of information and the article's construction would enhance its credibility and allow readers to better assess its impartiality.