Zuckerberg denies Meta bought rivals to conquer them

Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg on Wednesday denied in court that his company bought rival services Instagram and WhatsApp to neutralise them, as his testimony in a landmark antitrust case came to a close.

The case could see the Facebook owner forced to divest itself of the two apps, which have grown into global powerhouses since their buyouts.

During his third and final day on the stand in a federal courtroom in Washington, Zuckerberg took aim at the Federal Trade Commission's main argument that Facebook, since renamed Meta, devoured what it saw as competitive threats.

The co-founder of Facebook responded "No" when asked by Meta attorney Mark Hansen if his intent was to eliminate rivals with the purchases of photo sharing app Instagram and messaging service WhatsApp.

• .

  Keep Reading

• 
  Ex-couple fights over control of K'Osewe empire
• 
  How Meta made Sh4 trillion in ad revenue last quarter and how you can create one
• 
  EU's legal weapon facing the heat from US Big Tech
• 
  Meta's Zuckerberg dines with Trump in move to mend ties

He explained that Instagram, purchased in 2012, was attractive for "its camera and photo sharing experience" but added that he "didn't view it as a broad network really competitive with where we were."

As for WhatsApp, bought two years later, Zuckerberg testified that he saw the app as technically impressive but its founders as "unambitious" in terms of "maximising the impact that they could potentially have."

"I basically ended up pushing to add things," he told the court.

Zuckerberg testified that Facebook put its scale and resources to work building Instagram and WhatsApp into apps now used by billions of people.

Former Meta chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg testified after Zuckerberg, echoing much of what he told the court.

Meta has had to take on an array of rivals, including internet colossus Google as internet competition has become increasingly competitive, according to Sandberg.

"Every time you go on your computer or phone, you have a choice of what you spend your time on," Sandberg said.

"That's what all these producers are competing for: your time and attention."

TikTok as new threat

A key part of the courtroom battle is how the Federal Trade Commission convincingly defines Meta's market for the judge.

The US government argues that Facebook and Instagram are dominant players in apps that provide a way to connect with family and friends, a category that does not include TikTok and YouTube.

Meta's defense attorneys counter that substantial investments transformed these acquisitions into the blockbusters they are today. They also highlight that Meta's apps are free for users and face fierce competition.

The case was originally filed in December 2020, in the last days of President Donald Trump's first administration.

Zuckerberg, the world's third-richest person, has made repeated visits to the White House as he has tried to persuade the president to choose a settlement instead of fighting the trial.

As part of his lobbying efforts,  Zuckerberg contributed to Trump's inauguration fund and overhauled content moderation policies.

He also purchased a $23 million mansion in Washington in what was seen as a bid to spend more time close to the center of political power.

Zuckerberg wrapped up some 12 hours of testimony on Wednesday with an assessment of TikTok, which he said has emerged as perhaps the biggest competitive threat for Instagram and Facebook.

Meta has seen the growth of its apps slow as the China-based video-snippet sharing sensation has boomed, so the US tech titan added a TikTok-like Reels feature to fire back in the marketplace, according to Zuckerberg.

"That said, TikTok is still bigger than either Facebook or Instagram, and I don't like it when our competitors do better than us," he told the court.

And as video has evolved into a favourite form of online media, particularly on smartphones, YouTube has become serious competition for Meta, the chief executive testified.