Post
"Meta argued that it could not constitute a social media monopoly for a simple reason: it was no longer, in any meaningful sense, a social media company."
Well, I won't argue wth that.
Törnberg, P., & Rogers, R. (2026). Towards a Post-Social Media Studies (6nue7_v1). SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/6nue7_v1
"Its own data bore this out: only 7 percent of time spent on Instagram and 17 percent on Facebook involved consuming content from friends or followed accounts. The overwhelming remainder was spent watching video [...] recommended by AI-powered algorithms Meta had developed as a “direct competitive response to TikTok’s rise” (Meta Platforms, Inc., 2025). 🧵
🧵 What Meta’s lawyers presented as a defense of their market position was, inadvertently, a precise diagnosis of a broader structural transformation: the company that invented the social network had, by its own account, ceased to operate one."
@fuzzyleapfrog
Seems like a ridiculous argument, though. If I control 100% of market A and 10% of market B and market B is more important to my business, I'm still a monopoly in market A.
@spacehobo
@smolwaffle Feel free to let the judge know. @spacehobo
@fuzzyleapfrog
Looks like it's being appealed so there will be another opportunity! https://apnews.com/article/ftc-meta-appeal-antitrust-752463c7783ba14b00b686fe0c933f88
Also sorry, I didn't mean that as a contradiction of what you were saying about them not being mostly a social media company. I apologize if it came off that way.
@spacehobo
Install bonfire.cafe
Get the full app experience
