
Writing about the government’s antitrust case against Meta is a little like putting on an old sweater — it’s comfortable and worn, but also has kind of a funky smell (maybe it’s best for everyone if I don’t continue with this metaphor). In any case, I have been writing about this topic off and on for more than half a decade now. I wrote about it for the Columbia Journalism Review (where I was the chief digital writer from 2017 to 2024) when the case was first launched in 2020, at the tail end of the first Trump administration. After a bunch of presentations from the Federal Trade Commission and a variety of opinions from Meta watchers and antitrust experts, the case was thrown out because Judge Boasberg of the US District Court for the District of Columbia said the government failed to provide compelling evidence that Meta had a monopoly on the market for any kind of distinct market for something known as “social networking.”
I wrote about the case again in 2020 when it was revived by the Biden administration, based in part on arguments from antitrust theorist Lina Khan, who took over as the chairman of the FTC. At that point, Boasberg ruled that the government had met his test for showing that Meta had a monopoly on a distinct enough market for him to let the case proceed. At the time, he said that “while there are certainly bones one could pick with the FTC’s market-definition allegations, the Court does not find them fatally devoid of meat.” Meta tried to get the court to dismiss the case in 2022 for a variety of reasons, none of which had much substance, and then both sides basically said they needed more time to get their arguments in order and marshall all of the evidence, and that’s how it took three years before the case actually showed up in court.
During that time, of course, the US switched presidents, and Trump returned for a second term. That’s when all hell broke loose on a host of different fronts: massive tariffs against China and dozens of other nations, threats to take over Greenland and the Panama Canal, threats to make Canada the 51st state, mass deportations of alleged criminals — including some US citizens and green-card holders — to a for-profit prison in El Salvador, without a trial or any evidence being provided (Boasberg is also hearing a case about that, by a strange coincidence). Homeland Security and ICE are using artificial intelligence and surveillance software to track down “undesirables,” including anyone who has said anything even remotely positive about Palestine, or remotely negative about either Trump or his bizarre and likely also illegal policies (I wrote about this for last week’s edition of The Torment Nexus, in case you missed it).
Note: This is a version of my Torment Nexus newsletter, which I send out via Ghost, the open-source publishing platform. You can see other issues and sign up here.
Continue reading “Meta may be bad but the FTC’s antitrust case is still weak”

























