Business & Economics
Federal Court Rejects FTC Push to Break Up Meta’s Instagram and WhatsApp
On 19 Nov 2025, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg dismissed the FTC’s 2020 antitrust suit, ruling the agency failed to show Meta still wields monopoly power in social networking, so no divestiture is required.
Focusing Facts
- The 89-page decision, issued 19 Nov 2025 in D.C. federal court, ends the FTC’s request to force Meta to sell Instagram (bought 2012) and WhatsApp (bought 2014).
- Boasberg relied on evidence that only 7 % of Instagram user time is now spent on friends’ posts and highlighted TikTok and YouTube as direct competitors, rejecting the FTC’s narrow ‘personal social networking’ market definition.
- The ruling diverges from two 2025 decisions that labeled Google a monopoly in search and online ads, signaling uneven antitrust outcomes across Big Tech.
Context
Antitrust battles often hinge on whether regulators can define a stable market—1911’s Standard Oil and 1984’s AT&T break-ups targeted industries with clear product boundaries and slow technological churn. Boasberg’s opinion underscores that, in contrast, social media resembles 1990s software markets (cf. U.S. v. Microsoft, 1998-2001) where rapid feature convergence blurred lines between browsers, OS, and apps; the attempted Microsoft breakup ultimately failed on appeal. The ruling reflects a broader trend: digital platforms mutate faster than statutory frameworks, complicating retroactive trust-busting. Over the next century, the precedent may entrench the idea that fluid, data-driven ecosystems are self-correcting via new entrants, reducing the likelihood of structural remedies and pushing regulators toward conduct-based or pre-merger tools instead. Whether that bet on perpetual disruption holds—especially once AI and platform integration deepen network effects—will shape how societies balance innovation with concentrated private power.
Perspectives
Tech industry and business-oriented outlets
e.g., SiliconANGLE, Economic Times, Digit — The ruling confirms that Meta no longer wields monopoly power because fast-moving rivals like TikTok and YouTube keep the market fiercely competitive, so forcing a breakup would stifle innovation. These publications lean toward industry optimism, foregrounding Meta’s statements about "American innovation" while glossing over the FTC’s evidence of past ‘buy-or-bury’ tactics, reflecting an incentive to stay in good standing with big-tech sources and investor-minded readers.
International public-service and watchdog-style news outlets
e.g., Deutsche Welle, MyJoyOnline — The decision is a significant setback for antitrust regulators, illustrating how political influence and a judge viewed as hostile to the FTC helped Big Tech dodge accountability for acquisitions meant to neutralize competition. By stressing Judge Boasberg’s alleged bias and Meta’s donations to President Trump, these stories frame the outcome as politically tainted, which can amplify distrust even where the legal reasoning may be sound, aligning with an editorial mission to scrutinize U.S. corporate power.