Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Nikita Sokolsky's avatar

> The FTC’s present case is not entirely meritless, however

Wait, this post ignores the most important argument: Facebooks product offerings are not essential goods and as such cannot be considered a monopoly, no matter what they do. They cannot be compared to the pharmaceutical market: nobody will die if Facebook shuts down tomorrow but lots of people will die if the supply of insulin is restricted.

“Is it essential?” should be the very first question to ask!

Expand full comment
Andrew's avatar

Hi thanks for the write-up. I will offer you a concrete way in which consumers are harmed by this merger. I personally, will not use whatsapp because I am worried about fb harvesting my data in a way that is long term bad for me. Not using it is to my detriment at times as I am unable to take part in certain conversations (for example parents of my kids class in a whatsapp group). Bilateral comms arent an issue because many other messaging apps exist.

I accept that my position may be mistaken, and the fact that these groups get formed on Whatsapp in the first place suggests not many others share it. But strictly as a consumer I would benefit if they were broken up.

I do certainly appreciate that doing this after the fact has a chilling effect. And also the suggestion that it is politically motivated is good reason for the court to be skeptical. I dont attempt to weigh my private interest against these considerations. I only offer it as an example.

Expand full comment
6 more comments...

No posts