Meta faces moment of truth

The Big Story
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Meta have wrapped up a six-week trial over the Facebook and Instagram parent's alleged social networking monopoly, leaving the final decision in the hands of the judge.
© Thibault Camus, Associated Press
The trial, which came to a close last week, seeks to determine whether Meta has a monopoly over personal social networking that the company entrenched with its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.
Here's what to know about the trial and what comes next:
Full-circle moment for Trump administration
The FTC's trial with Meta represented a full-circle moment for the second Trump administration, after the agency originally brought the case at the tail end of President Trump's first administration.
The agency sued Meta, then known as Facebook, in December 2020. The case came as part of a push by the Trump administration to take aim at major tech firms, following the Department of Justice's (DOJ) antitrust lawsuit against Google.
Zuckerberg tries to settle, ends up on stand
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg reportedly courted Trump and White House officials to settle the case in the weeks leading up to the trial.
However, these efforts don't appear to have paid dividends. The Meta CEO's initial offer of $450 million was brushed aside, with the FTC demanding at least $18 billion and a consent decree, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Zuckerberg reportedly upped his offer to $1 billion, but to no avail. The Meta trial began mid-April, and the FTC immediately called Zuckerberg to the stand, where he spent three days facing questions.
Who is Meta's competition?
At the heart of the trial is the FTC's claim that Meta has a monopoly over personal social networking — a market that includes Meta's apps, as well as Snapchat and MeWe and is centered on sharing between family and friends.
Meta has pushed back on this market definition, arguing it faces competition from a much broader swath of social media platforms, including TikTok, YouTube, X and iMessage.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg has seemed skeptical of the FTC's proposed market, noted Geoffrey Manne, president and founder of the International Center for Law & Economics.
'The judge has expressed some reservations about the way the FTC is trying to demonstrate its market definition, but obviously the underlying issue is monopoly power,' Manne told The Hill.
Read more in a full report at TheHill.com tomorrow.
Welcome to The Hill's Technology newsletter, we're Miranda Nazzaro and Julia Shapero — tracking the latest moves from Capitol Hill to Silicon Valley.
Did someone forward you this newsletter? Subscribe here.
Essential Reads
How policy will be impacting the tech sector now and in the future:
Greene says she'll oppose Trump's 'big beautiful bill' if AI provision isn't removed
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) is calling on the Senate to eliminate a provision that would ban state regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) from President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill,' arguing it violates states' rights. 'Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years,' Greene …
Warren releases 130-accusation report on Elon Musk's tenure
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) on Tuesday released a 130-accusation report on tech billionaire Elon Musk's time as a special government employee, arguing he profited from his work in the Trump administration. 'While serving as a 'Special Government Employee' in the White House and leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Musk has maintained extensive financial conflicts of interest through his ownership or stake …
'Disgusting abomination': Elon Musk tears into Trump megabill
Billionaire Elon Musk ramped up his criticism of the megabill of President Trump's tax cut and spending priorities, calling the legislation a 'disgusting abomination.' 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' Musk posted Tuesday on his social platform X. 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know …
Speaker Johnson calls Musk criticism of Trump agenda bill 'terribly wrong'
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Tuesday said Elon Musk's sharp criticism of the party's massive tax cuts and spending bill is 'terribly wrong.' The comments came minutes after Musk torched the sprawling package on X, calling it 'a disgusting abomination.' 'Let me say this: It's very disappointing,' Johnson told reporters at the Capitol, later adding: 'With all due respect, my friend Elon is terribly wrong about the one big, …
The Refresh
News we've flagged from the intersection of tech and other topics:
Crypto Corner
A new crypto wallet for $TRUMP token?
© Samuel Corum/Politico/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Welcome to Crypto Corner, a daily feature focused on digital currency and its outlook in Washington.
Magic Eden, a non-fungible token (NFT) marketplace, announced Tuesday it is partnering with the team behind the $TRUMP memecoin to launch a crypto wallet.
A crypto wallet is a tool that allows users to store and manage their cryptocurrencies or other blockchain assets.
In a statement on X, Magic Eden said the wallet is 'coming soon,' and described it as the 'first and only crypto wallet for true Trump fans.'
A waitlist for the $TRUMP Wallet began Tuesday at trumpwallet.com and Magic Eden said it will offer up to $1 million in $TRUMP rewards for those who sign up or refer at least one other person.
The wallet, like the $TRUMP meme coin, is marketed with a graphic of President Trump, and is the latest expansion of Trump's crypto ventures. Both the president and first lady have meme coins with their image and likeness.
Jack Lu, the CEO of Magic Eden, said the partnership 'represents our commitment to onboarding mainstream audience deeper into crypto.'
Using the wallet, users will be able to trade the $TRUMP token, along with major assets like Bitcoin, Solana and Ethereum.
Trump's sons, Eric and Donald Trump Jr., who lead efforts at the family's cryptocurrency company World Liberty Financial, said they had no knowledge of the product.
'The Trump Organization has zero involvement with this wallet product. @EricTrump and I know nothing about it. Stay tuned—World Liberty Financial @worldlibertyfi, which we have been working tirelessly on, will be launching our official wallet soon,' Trump Jr. wrote on X.
'I run @Trump and I know nothing about this project! @worldlibertyfi $Trump @AmericanBTC,' Eric Trump added.
Trump has come under scrutiny for his crypto ventures, especially his meme coin. Last month, he hosted a private dinner with the top investors in his meme coin, which Democrats dubbed as a 'pay-to-play scheme.'
In Other News
Branch out with other reads on The Hill:
Trump administration extends tariff pause on Chinese-made chips for 90 days
The Trump administration has extended a long-running exemption for Chinese-made chips from a 25 percent tariff imposed during President Trump's first administration. The office of U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a notice posted Saturday it was extending the exemption, set to expire that day, to Aug. 31. The 25 percent tariff, which initially went into effect in 2019, would have applied to a variety …
What Others are Reading
Two key stories on The Hill right now:
Hegseth orders Navy strip oiler ship USNS Harvey Milk of name
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered the Navy to rename an oil ship named after gay rights activist Harvey Milk, a move that pointedly comes … Read more
White House sends Congress request for $9.4B in DOGE cuts
The White House on Tuesday sent Congress a request to claw back $9.4 billion in funding for foreign aid and to public broadcasting — the first package … Read more
What Others are Reading
Opinions related to tech submitted to The Hill:
You're all caught up. See you tomorrow!

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

USA Today

16 minutes ago

• USA Today

Why did US bomb Iran? In Trump's vibes war, it's impossible to trust anyone.

At least the last time a Republican president got America involved in a military quagmire in the Middle East he had the decency to cook up a bunch of phony reasons beforehand. The day after President Donald Trump launched attacks on Iranian nuclear sites and swept an unprepared nation into another Middle-Eastern conflict, Vice President JD Vance said the most ludicrous thing imaginable. Asked if he and Trump trust the U.S. intelligence community and its assessments, which had been that Iran was not close to developing a nuclear weapon, Vance replied: 'Of course we trust our intelligence community, but we also trust our instincts.' Your instincts? Trump and Vance just marched America into a potential war because the vibes felt real nuclear-weapon-y? Trump didn't even take time to lie to Americans before bombing Iran At least the last time a Republican president got America involved in a military quagmire in the Middle East he had the decency to cook up a bunch of phony reasons beforehand. These guys just hauled off and dropped bombs and now want us to sit back and trust their hunch that it was the right move. In 2003, former Secretary of State Colin Powell went to the trouble of holding up a blue-capped vial of fake anthrax before the U.N. Security Council to back up the Bush administration's claims that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was producing weapons of mass destruction. (Spoiler alert: Nope!) All we got from the Trump team was a lie that the president was going to ponder the bombing option for a spell, and then a stupid Truth Social post saying the bombing had happened. No congressional approval. No case made to the American people. Just bombs away, then a bunch of people known for their dishonesty trotting out and saying, 'Trust us, this was a good thing.' Trump just bombed Iran. We deserve to know why, but don't count on the truth. | Opinion Marco Rubio, like much of the Trump administration, hates intelligence Pressed on CBS' 'Face the Nation' to explain what intelligence led the administration to think bombs needed to be dropped, a frustrated Secretary of State Marco Rubio uttered three words that perfectly encapsulate President Trump, his cabinet and the entire MAGA movement: 'Forget about intelligence.' They should put that on hats. Vance swears Americas is only a little bit at war with Iran Vance continued to stumble about during his June 22 interviews, telling NBC News: 'We do not want war with Iran. We actually want peace.' Because nothing says 'we want peace' quite like firing a couple dozen tomahawk missiles at a country before walloping it with more than a dozen 30,000-pound bombs known as 'Massive Ordnance Penetrators.' On ABC, the duplicitous Mr. Vance made this whiplash-inducing claim: 'We are not at war with Iran, we're at war with Iran's nuclear program.' So we don't want war, we want peace, but we're at war with Iran's nuclear program, but we're not at war with Iran. That's starting to sound a bit like, 'I want to love you but you keep making me drop bombs on you, so it's all your fault.' Opinion: From massive protests to a puny parade, America really let Donald Trump down Of course this Age of Stupidity brought us a war based on vibes And in the same NBC News interview, he barfed out this gem: 'I empathize with Americans who are exhausted after 25 years of foreign entanglements in the Middle East. I understand the concern, but the difference is that back then we had dumb presidents.' Buddy, right now we have a dumb president. We have a president who still hasn't accepted he lost the 2020 presidential election, one who misspelled his own name in a June 22 social-media post that read: 'The GREAT B-2 pilots have just landed, safely, in Missouri. Thank you for a job well done!!! DONAKD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!' Thank you, Donakd! We have a president who, just hours after his Defense secretary said the Iran mission 'was not, has not been about regime change,' posted this: 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' MIGA? Those are the words of a dumb president. And he's the same president who in his previous term took the word of Russian President Vladimir Putin over information from America's intelligence community. Choosing who to trust here is nearly impossible So what are the Russians who Trump trusts saying about America's bombing of Iran? Russian Security Council deputy chairman Dmitry Medvedev said it didn't accomplish much and the nation's nuclear sites suffered only minor damage. 'The enrichment of nuclear material – and, now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons – will continue,' Medvedev said on social media. 'A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads.' So who do we trust? The Russians, who Trump apparently trusts? Rubio, the guy telling us to forget intelligence? Vance, the guy who wants us to roll with the vibes? Trump, the guy who seems deathly allergic to honesty? If you elect liars, you're going to get lied to It's simple: We can't trust anyone in this administration. They're liars and sycophants from top to bottom, either too lazy or too full of themselves to even pretend they can present a clear case for this risky military action. If Trump's bombing of Iran proves successful – and I, of course, hope it does – it'll be dumb luck. But if it leads to disaster, it'll be exactly what anyone paying attention to these reckless hucksters predicted. Follow USA TODAY columnist Rex Huppke on Bluesky at @ and on Facebook at You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.

The Hill

17 minutes ago

• The Hill

Pakistan nominates Trump for Nobel Peace Prize, then condemns strikes on Iran

Pakistan on Sunday condemned U.S. strikes against Iran, one day after Islamabad announced it had nominated President Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize for his mediation of a ceasefire between Pakistan and India last month. Pakistan said the U.S. attacks violated norms of international law and voiced support for Iran's right to retaliate in self-defense. 'Pakistan condemns the US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities which follow the series of attacks by Israel. We are gravely concerned at the possible further escalation of tensions in the region,' the Pakistani Foreign Ministry said in a statement. 'The unprecedented escalation of tension and violence, owing to ongoing aggression against Iran is deeply disturbing. Any further escalation of tensions will have severely damaging implications for the region and beyond.' Pakistan on Saturday announced it was nominating Trump for a Nobel prize for the president's 'decisive diplomatic intervention and pivotal leadership during the recent India-Pakistan crisis.' The government praised Trump for 'pragmatic diplomacy and effective peace-building' and added that Islamabad was hopeful the president would also resolve ongoing crises in the Middle East, including humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip and 'the deteriorating escalation involving Iran.' Trump has lamented not getting a Nobel prize during his first term. On June 20, he posted a long missive on Truth Social listing different diplomatic actions from his first term and some from his second term that he 'won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for doing.' 'No, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do, including Russia/Ukraine, and Israel/Iran, whatever those outcomes may be, but the people know, and that's all that matters to me!' he wrote.

Yahoo

21 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' is getting more expensive as the world's attention is on Iran

The long-awaited summer collision course for President Trump's economic agenda is here and now competing for attention with geopolitics. The competing storylines are playing out — just in parallel — after a weekend where the president's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" saw a new higher price tag and the removal of key provisions in developments that were fully overshadowed by a weekend attack on Iran. Trump's priorities for taxes and the debt ceiling — not to mention tariffs — still face key deadlines in the weeks ahead even as foreign affairs takes center stage. On Saturday evening, shortly after the attacks on Iran commenced, Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) even released an analysis that made official how recent changes to Trump's tax-cut bill in the Senate are likely to increase the package's price tag by hundreds of billions of dollars. The group found that Senate's changes on the tax front — once economists untangled a key budget gimmick — mean the bill will potentially add about $4.2 trillion to the deficits in the years ahead if passed as is. The bill is also undergoing a close examination by the Senate parliamentarian who is moving section-by-section and has already deemed some provisions — such as a defunding of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) as well cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — are not in line with Senate reconciliation rules. And more changes are likely coming this week that could increase the price tag and political pressure even further as key Republicans are still saying they will vote no, throwing into doubt a GOP goal of final votes within days. It all could also have near-term economic impacts. Brian Rehling, Wells Fargo head of global fixed income strategy, said in a recent Yahoo Finance Live appearance that developments in the bill could be 'more consequential' to things like interest rates for the time being over even signals from the Federal Reserve. These developments come just weeks before Trump and the Republican's self-imposed deadline to get the bill signed into law by July 4. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has said that means the Senate will need to pass this bill this week to keep the timeline on pace. The weekend's Joint Committee on Taxation analysis was focused specifically on the Senate Finance Committee's tax proposals and offered a headline number that would appear to be good news for fiscal hawks: It found the projected cost of the revised bill comes to about $441 billion over the coming decade. But that calculation came using an accounting maneuver known as a "current policy" baseline that allows the bill to be calculated assuming current tax levels stay the same. That means Congress can say the cost of extending expiring provisions in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is free, at least for accounting purposes. Republicans defend the practice, with Senate Finance Committee chair Mike Crapo offering that it 'more accurately reflects reality.' But the bottom line is that these zeroed out tax extensions are projected to add about $3.8 trillion to the national debt — versus the scenario of Congress doing nothing. "Ignore the $441 number, which is both trying to hide the cost of extensions and gimmick some specific policies to make them look cheaper," offered Marc Goldwein of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget following the release. Andrew Lautz of the Bipartisan Policy Center also offered a detailed breakdown of the differences brought by the assumptions — such as how it makes the approximately $2.1 trillion in costs from extending individual tax rates cuts look instead like they instead come to $83 billion. Both Goldwein and Lautz and others say the full price tag that should be considered is a total impact to the nation's debt of $4.2 trillion over the next decade. The new price tag projections also come as the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, is going through the bill line by line to see if it complies with the Senate's strict reconciliation rules. It's part of a wonky Senate process — known colloquially as a 'Byrd bath' after a rule enshrined by Robert Byrd of West Virginia — that sets limits of what can be fast tracked and what is subject to the normal 60-vote threshold. MacDonough has already analyzed the Banking and Commerce and Judiciary and Homeland Security committee portions of the bill and found a series of provisions must be taken out. Pieces that appear set to be removed from the bill so far include one that would have placed a funding cap on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) as well as others that cut the SNAP program. The apparent removal of cuts to the SNAP program around state matching funds could have a significant fiscal impact, with those provisions previously estimated to save roughly $128 billion. One other closely watched provision by the tech community — to cut broadband funding for states that regulate artificial intelligence — has been allowed to stay in but still faces political opponents pushing to have it struck from the package. It's a series of rulings that Republicans contend aren't yet final but appear set to change the makeup of the overall package. "The Byrd Rule is enshrined in law for a reason, and Democrats are making sure it is enforced," said top Democratic Senator on the Budget committee, Oregon's Jeff Merkley, in a statement. And even more significant changes could be coming in the days ahead with the parliamentarian scheduled to next take a pass as the Senate Finance committee's portion of the bill. That where the biggest ticket items reside like tax provisions as well as Medicaid cuts. Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices