FTC v. Meta: The End of Antitrust Populism?

In a watershed decision, Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in favor of Meta in the long-running FTC v. Meta antitrust case. The FTC argued that the company monopolized the limited “personal social networking” market—online services that connect friends and family—which it defined to include only Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and MeWe. Contrary to the government’s theory, however, the court found that the evidence clearly demonstrated intense competition for users between Facebook and video-sharing platforms like TikTok and YouTube, undermining the FTC’s claim.

Because Judge Boasberg concluded that the FTC failed to prove Meta held a social media monopoly, he did not consider whether the company’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp were anticompetitive. But did he get it right? And, with yet another proposed Big Tech breakup off the table, does this decision effectively mark the end of the populist antitrust crusade to dismantle America’s leading technology firms?

Please join ITIF’s Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy for a virtual panel with top experts who will discuss this landmark decision, its implications for the social media landscape, and what it means for the U.S. government’s ongoing assaults on Big Tech.

Questions for the speakers? Ask on Slido.