Will Meta be required to surrender Instagram and WhatsApp?

Meta Platforms, the moms and dad business of Facebook, is encountering a spots antitrust test in Washington that might essentially improve the framework of the social networks titan.

At the heart of the instance are 2 of the business’s greatest procurements– Instagram and WhatsApp– which the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) declares were acquired to squash competitors, not foster technology.

The FTC suggests that after falling short to complete successfully with arising social applications, Meta transformed to procurement as a way of removing risks.

The company’s grievance cases Meta developed “entry barriers that for more than a decade protected Meta’s dominance,” which the marketplace has actually considering that done not have “reasonable alternatives” for customers.

The test notes among one of the most top-level antitrust obstacles in current technology background. If effective, it might compel Meta to unload Instagram and WhatsApp– 2 systems that have actually ended up being important not simply to Meta’s organization version, yet to worldwide interaction.

In 2012, Facebook acquired Instagram– a then-nascent photo-sharing system without any marketing and a little cult adhering to– for $1 billion in cash money and supply.

The bargain, later on valued at $750 million after Facebook’s IPO, was a noteworthy change from the business’s earlier pattern of getting start-ups just to close them down and absorb their skill, in what Silicon Valley terms “acqui-hires.”

Instagram was the very first business Facebook purchased and remained to run as a standalone application. Two years later on, in 2014, the business made a vibrant $22 billion acquisition of WhatsApp, a swiftly expanding messaging solution.

These procurements allowed Facebook to pivot from a desktop-centric version to mobile-first systems, making certain importance amongst more youthful individuals and adjusting to transforming customer behavior.

Critics– consisting of the FTC– claim these calculated procurements were much less regarding item advancement and even more regarding neutralising possible opponents.

“Meta has maintained a monopoly by pursuing Zuckerberg’s strategy, expressed in 2008: ‘It is better to buy than compete.’ True to that maxim, Facebook has systematically tracked potential rivals and acquired companies that it viewed as serious competitive threats,” the FTC declares.

Meta CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Mark Zuckerberg took the stand in what numerous are calling a zero hour for the business. On the very first day of test, FTC lawyer Daniel Matheson wondered about Zuckerberg on inner interactions that showed issue over Facebook’s failure to construct an affordable photo-sharing application.

“The way I read this message is that I’m not happy about how we’re executing on that project,” Zuckerberg claimed, of Facebook’s internal efforts to competingInstagram When asked if this irritation was because of Instagram’s fast development, he reacted, “That does seem to be what I’m highlighting.”

Later, when pressed on whether Meta purposely overlooked Instagram in favour of Facebook after the procurement, Zuckerberg differed. “In method, we wound up spending a heap in it after we obtained it,” he stated, adding that Instagram received significant resources.

Zuckerberg also addressed the shifting nature of online engagement. Reflecting on a 2018 decision to prioritise posts from friends over public content, he said, “I think we misunderstood how social engagement online was evolving. People just kept on engaging with more and more stuff that wasn’t what their friends were doing.”

He estimated that now, “around 20 per cent of content on Facebook and 10% on Instagram is generated by users’ friends,” showing a broader shift in how users interact on social platforms.

The FTC’s argument

At the heart of the FTC’s argument is the belief that Meta holds a monopoly in the specific market of social platforms used to share content with friends and family — a definition that notably excludes platforms like TikTok, YouTube, Apple’s iMessage, and X (formerly Twitter), which are more geared toward content sharing based on interests or broadcasting to the public.

FTC attorney Daniel Matheson contends that Meta bought Instagram and WhatsApp to “erect a moat” around its business and preserve its dominance.

The lawsuit claims that these acquisitions are not just historical issues — they continue to shape the market today by limiting user choice and deterring new entrants. Meta, however, contends that the FTC is selectively narrowing the market definition to build its case.

In a statement, the company argued, “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. More than 10 years after the FTC reviewed and cleared our acquisitions, the Commission’s action in this case sends the message that no deal is ever truly final.”

Jennifer Newstead, Meta’s chief legal officer, went further in a blog post, writing, “It’s absurd that the FTC is trying to break up a great American company at the same time the Administration is trying to save Chinese-owned TikTok.”

The financial stakes for Meta are massive. Instagram, according to research firm Emarketer, is expected to generate $37.13 billion in 2025 — a little over half of Meta’s US ad revenue.

“Instagram is now Meta’s biggest money maker in the US, its most lucrative market, where the app accounts for 50.5% of the company’s ad revenues in 2025,” The Guardian quoted Jasmine Enberg, a principal analyst at Emarketer. “Instagram has also been picking up the slack for Facebook on the user front, particularly among young people, for a long time.”

WhatsApp, on the other hand, contributes less to Meta’s current revenue but is the company’s most-used app in terms of daily users.

It plays a vital role in Meta’s strategy to monetise business messaging through tools like chatbots and commerce features. Zuckerberg has described this segment as the “next wave of growth” for the company.

If the FTC succeeds in breaking up Meta, the agency would need to hold a second trial to prove that such a move would, in fact, restore competition in the marketplace. Such a remedy phase is likely to be as contentious and complex as the current proceedings.

A broader suppression on Big Tech

The Meta test is being carefully seen as the very first significant examination of the Trump management’s present FTC method. The claim was initially submitted in 2020, throughout Trump’s very first term. The continuous process are currently a base test for just how much government enforcers want to head to control Big Tech.

Joe Simonson, an FTC representative, signified the company’s dedication: “The Trump-Vance FTC could not be more ready for this trial. We are blessed with some of the most hardworking and intelligent lawyers in the country who are working around the clock.”

The FTC’s present chair, Lina Khan, has actually been a singing movie critic of Meta’s procurement methods, implicating the business of using a “buy-or-bury” method.

“There’s no expiration date when it comes to the illegality of the transaction,” Khan claimed in an NBC meeting. “I think there is a way in which the entire social networking ecosystem looks different today because Facebook was permitted to go out and make these acquisitions.”

This instance unravels as various other technology titans, consisting of Amazon, Google, and Apple, are additionally encountering antitrust suits. Google was stated a prohibited syndicate by a government court in 2024, with the solution stage because instance start later on this April.

The test versus Meta is anticipated to extend right into July 2025. Presiding over the instance is United States District Judge James Boasberg, that has actually currently turned down Meta’s ask for recap judgment and permitted the FTC’s cases to continue.

In a November judgment, Boasberg kept in mind that the company “faces hard questions about whether its claims can hold up in the crucible of trial.”

Still, if the FTC dominates, the outcomes might be historical– noting the very first forced separation of a significant technology business considering that the taking apart of AT&T.

Also Watch:

With inputs from companies