Mark Zuckerberg Faces Day 1 Grilling in Landmark Antitrust Case: Will Meta Be Forced to Break Up?

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg appeared in federal court on Monday to testify in what could be one of the most significant legal battles for his $1.4 trillion company. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has accused Zuckerberg and other senior Meta leaders of orchestrating a “buy or bury” strategy to eliminate competition by purchasing rival apps like Instagram and WhatsApp.

The FTC’s opening remarks centered on the accusation that Meta, under Zuckerberg’s leadership, sought to create a monopoly by acquiring fast-growing competitors instead of competing with them directly. FTC lawyer Daniel Matheson argued that Meta’s actions over the years have effectively shut out other platforms and cemented its dominance in the “personal social networking” market.

Could Meta Be Forced to Restructure?

If the FTC’s case proves successful, the agency could seek a court order requiring Meta to restructure or divest from its key acquisitions, including Instagram and WhatsApp. Such a move would be unprecedented in modern corporate history, rivaling the government-ordered breakup of AT&T in the 1980s.

The trial, which is expected to unfold over several weeks, marks a high-stakes moment in Meta’s battle with the federal government. The case could have wide-reaching consequences for not just Meta, but for the broader tech industry and Silicon Valley’s growing power.

Zuckerberg’s Testimony: A Closer Look at Meta’s Strategy

Zuckerberg faced intense questioning about internal communications that revealed Meta’s awareness of Instagram’s rising threat in 2012, shortly before the company acquired the app. One email revealed Zuckerberg’s acknowledgment that Instagram’s rapid growth left Meta with little choice but to buy the company, a decision he framed as necessary for the survival of Facebook.

The FTC has painted this as evidence of Meta’s strategy to absorb its competition rather than allow it to thrive as an independent competitor. Matheson referred to it as a “buy or bury” strategy, saying Meta “decided that competition was too hard, and it would be easier to buy out their rivals rather than compete with them.”

Zuckerberg, however, defended Meta’s acquisitions, insisting that the company’s actions were motivated by its desire to innovate and improve its offerings, not eliminate competition. He pointed out that Facebook’s transformation over the years from a “friend connection” platform to a hub of third-party content, including news and groups, was a natural progression.

The Legal Tension Builds

As the trial progresses, Meta’s legal team, led by attorney Mark Hansen, has pushed back hard against the FTC’s claims, calling the case a “grab bag” of flawed theories. Hansen contends that the competition pool for Meta extends far beyond Instagram and WhatsApp, including platforms like TikTok and LinkedIn.

Judge James Boasberg, who is presiding over the case, has been carefully considering the arguments, and his ruling could shape the future of one of the world’s most influential tech companies.

What’s at Stake for Meta?

The outcome of this case could alter the landscape of the social media and tech industries. If the FTC succeeds, Meta could be forced to divest key assets and restructure its operations. It would mark the largest corporate breakup in decades and set a precedent for antitrust regulation in the tech world.

For now, Zuckerberg and Meta are locked in a fierce legal battle with the government, and the fate of the $1.4 trillion company rests in the hands of the court. The trial is expected to continue for several more weeks, with Zuckerberg’s testimony serving as a crucial moment in determining the future of Meta.