Lauren Feiner

Hemphill compares Meta’s claims that it’s power is constrained by newer apps like TikTok to Microsoft’s claims of being constrained by the PalmPilot and AOL at the time it was found to be an illegal monopolist. He says Microsoft sustained its dominance even in the face of competition “more or less on the margins.” He also says that what Meta calls “headwinds” from TikTok didn’t stop the company from beating its own revenue projection in 2024, which already forecast 78 percent growth from 2020.

Meta has argued that users’ reports about how much they think the company cares about them is mostly a reflection of media reporting, rather than actual changes to Meta’s products. Boasberg asks Hemphill whether changes in user sentiment really are about the actual products or perceptions of them, and whether that matters. Hemphill says that even in the case of Cambridge Analytica, where reporting came out long after the privacy incident at the heart of the story, “it’s not that the Facebook business in fact changed with the revelation, but what did happen was a sort of scales falling from your eyes effect, where users became aware of this possibility.” He adds that Meta pays attention to user sentiment “in a way that is not just managing their reputation.”

Meta shows fewer ads to what they call “needy users” whose engagement drops more significantly when they’re shown more ads. Hemphill calls this a “discount” for those users — and a sign of price discrimination by an illegal monopolist.

The FTC’s economic expert Scott Hemphill is back on the stand testifying about how Meta’s alleged monopoly power allows it to offer different prices to different users and across its services. For example, Meta didn’t show ads on Reels for a while, but it did show ads in other parts of the Instagram app. Hemphill compares this to what sounds like the antitrust case against Whole Foods — saying that a supermarket specializing in premium, natural foods might have high margins on its organic mangos, but low margins in areas on which it competes with many other stores, like pantry staples. He says this is similar to Meta lowering prices on the product where it competes with other apps (short-form videos) but not on the one where it dominates the market (friends and family sharing on Feed and Stories).

The judge is using Hemphill’s testimony to work through some remaining questions he has in how to think about reaching a verdict in this case. It’s too early to say what this means for his thinking, but his questions indicate that some of Meta’s arguments are at least spinning his wheels. He asks, for example, if users’ feeds are increasingly made up of posts from accounts users aren’t connected to (i.e. algorithmically-recommended influencer posts), then can time spent on the Instagram feed or stories really be used as a proxy for users’ wanting to see more posts from their friends?

Just because an alternative service can fulfill some of what a monopolist offers doesn’t make it an adequate substitute. Hemphill gives the example of Google’s search services. Sure, users can do a shopping search on Amazon or a travel search on Expedia, but these are “slivers of what it does,” Hemphill says. Boasberg’s own colleague in this courthouse found Google to be a monopolist for general search services despite this.

Boasberg posits a hypothetical: would it matter if only 10 percent of users’ time on Meta’s apps were spent on friend and family sharing — the use case the FTC says Meta monopolizes? This seems to be a key lingering question for the judge. “Does it have to encompass their core use? So, the majority of what users go to the platform for?” he adds. Hemphill acknowledges the slippery slope, but says that even at a hypothetical 10 percent of its business, that would still be “large and important and subject to monopolization, and it would still be something that we care about.”

Boasberg asks Hemphill to explain why the way users choose to spend their time when one app is down wouldn’t be relevant to show which apps are substitutes. “In fact, why isn’t that the best indicator about what is a substitute?” he adds. This is exactly the argument Meta’s made since the first day of trial: that users spending more time on Instagram after TikTok’s brief pre-ban shutdown shows users see it as a viable alternative.

Hemphill uses this to show that friends and family posts, found mostly in the Feed and Stories, are still core to the app. Over a few days in April 2022, less than 1 percent of Facebook users and about 5 percent of Instagram users who watched Reels did not also spend any time in the Feed or Stories features. “The point here is that yes, users are in addition spending time on Reels, but that Feed and Stories remain fundamental to at least part of the experience of the vast majority of users.”