As part of his lobbying efforts, Zuckerberg contributed to Trump’s inauguration fund and overhauled content moderation policies. He also purchased a $23 million mansion in Washington in what was seen as a bid to spend more time close to the center of political power.
Zuckerberg’s former lieutenant Sheryl Sandberg and a long line of executives from rival companies are scheduled to testify at a trial expected to last at least eight weeks.
Central to the case is Facebook’s 2012 billion-dollar purchase of Instagram — then a small but promising photo-sharing app that now boasts two billion active users.
An email from Zuckerberg cited by the FTC showed him depicting Instagram’s emergence as “really scary,” adding that is “why we might want to consider paying a lot of money for this.”
The FTC argues that Meta’s $19 billion WhatsApp acquisition in 2014 followed the same pattern, with Zuckerberg fearing the messaging app could either transform into a social network or be purchased by a competitor.
Meta’s defense attorneys counter that substantial investments transformed these acquisitions into the blockbusters they are today.
They also highlight that Meta’s apps are free for users and face fierce competition.
The FTC argues that Meta’s monopoly power is demonstrated by a severely downgraded user experience — with too many ads and product changes.
A key courtroom battleground will be how the FTC defines Meta’s market.
The US government argues that Facebook and Instagram are dominant players in apps that provide a way to connect with family and friends, a category that does not include TikTok and YouTube.
But Meta disagrees.
“The 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,” a spokesperson said.
“The bigger that Meta can make the relevant market… the more likely it is to defeat the FTC’s case,” said lawyer Brendan Benedict on Substack.