The government doesn’t understand Meta

The government must scrutinize the identification force. Unfortunately, his legal attack does not cut the heart of what keeps Meta big.

This week, I spent three days in a courtroom in Washington, DC, watching Mark Zuckerberg to attest. There was defending his company from its dismantling by the Federal Trade Committee, which is seeking to relax his Instagram and WhatsApp on the basis that it is anti -competition. Sometimes, he became uncomfortable and challenged by evidence that he wanted to “neutralize” competitors. In the first place, what I noticed is the misunderstanding of the Federal Trade Committee of how social media work.

To create the market, she says Meta has died, FTC has identified a sub -group of social media called “personal social media services”. This category includes applications that primarily facilitate sharing between friends and family, but for some reason, private messaging applications do not include. The government argues that the only competitors in this market are Snapchat and Mewe, a mysterious social network based on Blockchain claiming to have 20 million users. Comfortable for FTC, including only these two companies, Meta provides a legal monopoly in the United States with a market share of 80 percent.

FTC should know that this market definition is ridiculous because the agency’s main lawyer for the case, Daniel MattisonZuckerberg did not ask about Miwi Once During about 13 hours he was on the position of witnesses. When he was finally asked about MEWE, Meta’s main lawyer, Mark HansenZuckerberg witnessed that he had not heard in front of the government’s suit.

I sympathize with the difficulty of determining the market for the issue of fighting monopoly such as this and judgment James Pasperg Ultimately, the FTC definition (or much broader Meta definition) may ignore its interest anyway. After Google loses the issue of monopoly of advertising technology this week, it is worth noting that the judges have recently sentenced the government to the government in major claims to combat monopoly. On TV, FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson Meanwhile, he speaks to one audience by trying to frame the definition issue as a battle against censorship. This may give FTC a political advantage in a score behind the courtroom.

Whatever a kind of legal quarrel that FTC is trying to do here, it does not get the true source of the Meta power, or even the actual market in which it works. If the government accurately includes all the players whom Meta considers competitors – Tiktok, YouTube, IMESSAGE, X, Telegram, etc. Consumer behavior strongly suggests that this broader market is a reality; Meta provided internal data in the experiment, which showed how Facebook and Instagram traffic increased when Tiktok was briefly connected in the United States earlier this year.

Since it has focused on the acquisitions for more than a decade in a market that has undergone radical changes since then, FTC has greatly ignores what Meta has flourished on: network effects. The more people on a social network, the more difficult it becomes removed. Remember this lawsuit as a source of power, but it is far from focusing the case.

Once after time, Zuckerberg took advantage of the effects of the network to develop its empire. He did this with Facebook to develop Instagram. In contrast, the infrastructure developed for these applications was used to expand the WhatsApp range, which now includes approximately 3 billion users. He does this again using Instagram to develop interconnection indicators and integrate Llama powered features in all its applications.

“If any application becomes large enough, it has the opportunity to spread and do different things,” Zuckerberg of the Witness said. This can be a problem in combating monopoly in itself – for example, GOGLE was accused of using its influence in one market to fairly promote products in a different market – but it is a permanent source of strength that will not be simply resolved.

Instagram and Whatsapp spinning in different companies can create new competitors in the short term. But to keep this competition in the long run, you want to allow people to take their personal files, and perhaps even their friends are included, with them to other services. This type of things is the nightmare and organizational nightmare of implementation, but it does not deny that people want this level of control – just look at the tinnitus about Bluesky and Activitypub, which the latter has blocked themes. []

The FTC V experience started. Meta just and may still provide inspiring evidence that the company needs to be dismantled. However, so far, the government appears to miss this point.

Professional moves worth noting / job opportunities:

If you do not do so, do not forget to subscribe to freedomWhich includes unlimited access to Command line And all our reports.

As always, welcome your comments, especially if you have ideas about this problem or the idea of ​​a story to share it. You can respond here or ping me securely on the signal.