we know the complete slant and spins of ITIF. so many misstatements of facts by ITIF. these people are against all antitrust law and enforcement. I struggled to listen to these debaters.
this case is not about time and attention
Facebook/Instagram have total control of PSN to the point they can and do limit Friends/Family sharing; the numbers on sharing are controlled by Meta. This is harm. I want more people in my network to see my posts and Facebook and Instagram will not allow that. They limit our sharing with Friends/Family because they want us to watch videos so they can compete with Tiktok.
Instagram had 80m+ users before Facebook closed its purchase. Instagram was growing so fast Facebook freaked out. Instagram did not need Facebook for anything. It was Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook that was desperate to acquire Instagram. Facebook needed to Instagram as Facebook had nothing working on mobile phones. Facebook had an HTML5 website for Facebook and not a native app.
Tiktok is not Facebook or Instagram. My friends/family don't make content on Tiktok. They share nothing on Tiktok. These debaters people dont appear to understand the difference between the apps because they don't use them.
I am hoping the FTC wins and feel they should based on law and the facts.
Thank you Brendan Benedict for this article and specifically for your colorful commenting on the day to day court contest. Its hearing how you see it going that matters most.
I feel this case is for the FTC's to lose.
But I feel they made 3 mistakes. What do you and this board think?
1. Not arguing stronger against exhibit (DDX1.20-2) which you showed here:
Matt, your play-by-play of this trial is invaluable. You're exposing the legal arguments for the farce they are.
The question this raises is whether the incoherence of Meta's case even matters. We are watching a powerful arm of the Corporate State (Meta) go through a theatrical proceeding managed by another arm of the Corporate State (the judiciary). The outcome feels secondary to the performance of "due process."
It seems the arguments don't have to be sound, because the power they represent is absolute. This isn't a legal battle in the traditional sense; it's a ritual to sanctify the existing power structure. The real trial isn't happening in the courtroom; it's happening in the court of public opinion, and your work is the prosecution's best evidence that the entire system is rigged.
Thank you! And bonus points for using the word "kerfluffle".
watched you speak live today:
https://itif.org/events/2025/06/26/ftc-v-meta-takeways-from-a-landmark-trial/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8npn89G1ies
https://ibb.co/4n86f93Y
we know the complete slant and spins of ITIF. so many misstatements of facts by ITIF. these people are against all antitrust law and enforcement. I struggled to listen to these debaters.
this case is not about time and attention
Facebook/Instagram have total control of PSN to the point they can and do limit Friends/Family sharing; the numbers on sharing are controlled by Meta. This is harm. I want more people in my network to see my posts and Facebook and Instagram will not allow that. They limit our sharing with Friends/Family because they want us to watch videos so they can compete with Tiktok.
Instagram had 80m+ users before Facebook closed its purchase. Instagram was growing so fast Facebook freaked out. Instagram did not need Facebook for anything. It was Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook that was desperate to acquire Instagram. Facebook needed to Instagram as Facebook had nothing working on mobile phones. Facebook had an HTML5 website for Facebook and not a native app.
Tiktok is not Facebook or Instagram. My friends/family don't make content on Tiktok. They share nothing on Tiktok. These debaters people dont appear to understand the difference between the apps because they don't use them.
I am hoping the FTC wins and feel they should based on law and the facts.
Thank you
Hard core writing on this trial. Not sure if I am accurate, but my sense is this will not end up going for the FTC.
Thank you Brendan Benedict for this article and specifically for your colorful commenting on the day to day court contest. Its hearing how you see it going that matters most.
I feel this case is for the FTC's to lose.
But I feel they made 3 mistakes. What do you and this board think?
1. Not arguing stronger against exhibit (DDX1.20-2) which you showed here:
https://www.bigtechontrial.com/p/from-roadshow-to-expert-witness-courtroom
See chart DDX1.20-2 entitled "Broadcast Friends Sharing Decline Has Continued"
The FTC allowed Meta to present this unverified data against the PSN market.
Why weren't these numbers verified independently?
Why didn't the FTC argue Meta purposely throttles friend posts causing less sharing.
2. Not arguing that advertisers pay higher prices due to Meta's monopoly raising consumer prices.
We were told prices to acquire a customer have risen 20x.
The advertisers must raise consumer prices to cover ad costs but the FTC did not argue this.
3. Not arguing stronger that Social media has not changed.
Instead Meta decided to extend its monopoly to compete against Tiktok and Youtube.
Meta's greed should not allow it to avoid antitrust law for its core "network effect" PSN market.
Matt, your play-by-play of this trial is invaluable. You're exposing the legal arguments for the farce they are.
The question this raises is whether the incoherence of Meta's case even matters. We are watching a powerful arm of the Corporate State (Meta) go through a theatrical proceeding managed by another arm of the Corporate State (the judiciary). The outcome feels secondary to the performance of "due process."
It seems the arguments don't have to be sound, because the power they represent is absolute. This isn't a legal battle in the traditional sense; it's a ritual to sanctify the existing power structure. The real trial isn't happening in the courtroom; it's happening in the court of public opinion, and your work is the prosecution's best evidence that the entire system is rigged.