1744807625366Meta CEO Battles Regulators in Historic Case That May Change Social Media Landscape

 

Zuckerberg faced intense questioning in court regarding Meta’s acquisitions, as regulators accused the company of anti-competitive behaviour. The court's inquiries focused on Meta's purchases of Instagram and WhatsApp. Now, more than a decade after these deals transformed the landscape of social media, regulators are labelling them as anti-competitive and are calling for their reversal.

In this case, billions of users could influence the future of Big Tech. The critical question remains: will Zuckerberg's defence hold up, or will it lead to the dissolution of Meta?

 

The Antitrust Battle: What Are the Stakes

 

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has asserted that Meta acquired Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 to suppress competition. As a result, regulators proposed a breakup of the company in 2025, arguing that these acquisitions hindered innovation and reinforced Meta's monopolistic power.

Zuckerberg would rest his defence on the following two main grounds:

1. Competition Was Fierce— They would not be as successful or thriving as they are now, as Instagram and WhatsApp are struggling startups because of Meta.

2. A Breakup Will Harm Users— Bringing together an integrated network of features, such as cross-platform messaging, which is hampered by such features, has led to a better user experience.

However, court-disclosed internal emails suggest Zuckerberg considered Instagram a "threat" before he acquired it.

 

Key Arguments from the Trial  

 

1. Did Meta Kill Competition


 
The FTC maintains that 2025 FTC filings reveal Meta now controls 78% of cross-platform messaging– a key argument in the monopoly claim that Meta's acquisitions would manage to prevent the emergence of rivals. Had Instagram remained undisturbed as a platform, it indeed would have posed a threat to the supremacy of Facebook.  

Zuckerberg countered, saying that Instagram's progress was uncertain and that only Meta's resources could have helped it advance. 


 
2. The WhatsApp Whiplash: Privacy Promises vs. Integration

 

Regulators are accusing Meta of undoing WhatsApp's privacy promises through the integration of Messenger. Zuckerberg stated that the move directly responded to customer complaints regarding their ability to communicate across platforms. 


3. Break Up Meta


An unfavourable ruling for Meta would be an impetus to require a spin-off of Instagram and WhatsApp, devastatingly affecting the current social media ecosystem.

 

Meta’s Make-or-Break Moment: 2026 Showdown

 

The court cases are now expected to be resolved at the end of 2025, followed by a ruling expected in very early 2026. A defeat at Meta's end would mean:  

  • Its present forced divestiture would include Instagram and WhatsApp. 

  • Stricter merger regulations are imposed on all future technology acquisitions.

  • Increased scrutiny of the antitrust environment in general.  

For the moment, however, Zuckerberg seems confident. "Meta's growth comes from innovation, not anti-competitive behaviour," he testified.

 

What The Verdict Means 

 

The verdict in this case will have far-reaching consequences beyond just Meta. For example, requiring the company to divest Instagram and WhatsApp could lead to:

  • The emergence of new competitors in the social media landscape.

  • Stricter regulations regarding technology mergers.

  • A potential domino effect that could impact larger corporations.

As the final decision approaches in 2026, one thing is clear: the way we regulate Big Tech today will influence how people interact online for decades to come. This issue is not only about Meta's past deals; the verdict will also address the critical question of whether a small number of companies should control how billions of people connect with one another.