Meta’s beef with the press flares at its antitrust trial

Meta’s Antitrust Trial Ignites Feud with Tech Journalists
The courtroom drama unfolding in Washington, D.C., is serving up more than just legal arguments. Meta, the tech giant behind Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, is locked in a high-stakes antitrust battle with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). But it’s not just regulators Meta is clashing with—tensions with the press are stealing the spotlight, turning the trial into a fiery showdown. Here’s what’s happening, why it matters, and what it reveals about the rocky relationship between Big Tech and the media.
A Trial with Big Implications
The FTC’s case against Meta, which kicked off in April 2025, is one of the most significant antitrust battles in recent years. At its core, the lawsuit accuses Meta of illegally maintaining a monopoly in the social networking market through its 2012 acquisition of Instagram and 2014 purchase of WhatsApp. The FTC argues these moves were strategic plays to squash competition, cementing Meta’s dominance in a way that harms consumers and stifles innovation.
If the FTC prevails, the consequences could be seismic. U.S. District Judge James Boasberg could order Meta to divest Instagram and WhatsApp, fundamentally reshaping the social media landscape. For Meta, led by CEO Mark Zuckerberg, the trial is a fight to preserve its trillion-dollar empire. But amid the legal sparring, a surprising subplot has emerged: Meta’s open hostility toward the journalists covering the case.
Tensions Boil Over in Court
Meta’s Attorney Takes Aim
During the trial, Meta’s lead attorney, Kevin Hansen, didn’t hold back. While cross-examining an FTC witness, Hansen took a detour to attack the credibility of two prominent tech journalists. He highlighted scathing remarks made by one, who reportedly called Zuckerberg a “small little creature with a shriveled soul.” Another jab referenced a decades-old New York Post headline, “Headless Body in Topless Bar,” to paint the press as sensationalist and unreliable.
These courtroom theatrics weren’t just for show. They reflect a deeper grudge Meta holds against the media, which the company perceives as unfairly critical. By dragging journalists into the fray, Meta seems intent on undermining the narratives surrounding its business practices—narratives often shaped by the very reporters it’s now targeting.
Why the Press Is Under Fire
Meta’s swipe at journalists is no random outburst. The tech giant has long bristled at media scrutiny, particularly from outlets that question its market dominance, data practices, and acquisitions. The antitrust trial has amplified these tensions, with coverage dissecting Meta’s every move. For Meta, discrediting the press could be a tactic to sway public perception and cast doubt on the FTC’s case, which relies partly on media-driven narratives about the company’s alleged monopolistic behavior.
But this approach is risky. Alienating the press could backfire, fueling even sharper criticism and drawing more attention to Meta’s courtroom tactics. It also underscores a broader Silicon Valley trend: tech giants increasingly view the media as an adversary rather than a neutral observer.
The Bigger Picture: Tech vs. Media
The Meta trial is just the latest chapter in a fraught relationship between Big Tech and the press. Companies like Google, Apple, and Meta have faced growing scrutiny from journalists uncovering everything from privacy scandals to labor issues. In response, some tech firms have accused the media of bias or sensationalism, creating a cycle of mistrust.
This dynamic matters because the press plays a critical role in shaping public opinion and holding powerful corporations accountable. When a company like Meta openly spars with journalists, it raises questions about transparency and the free flow of information. For readers, it’s a reminder to approach tech news with a critical eye, seeking out diverse sources to get the full story.
Key Takeaways from the Trial So Far

Meta’s Defense: Meta argues that Instagram and WhatsApp thrived because of its investments, not anti-competitive tactics. It also claims to face stiff competition from platforms like TikTok, X, and Reddit.
FTC’s Stance: The FTC insists Meta dominates a narrowly defined “personal social networking” market, where it faces little real competition.
Press Conflict: Meta’s attacks on journalists reveal a strategic effort to control the narrative, but they may deepen public skepticism about the company.
What’s at Stake: A ruling against Meta could force a breakup, while a victory could embolden other tech giants to pursue aggressive acquisitions.

What’s Next for Meta and the Media?
As the trial continues—expected to stretch into the summer of 2025—all eyes are on Judge Boasberg’s eventual ruling. Will he side with the FTC and demand a breakup, or will Meta’s arguments about competition and innovation win the day? Equally important is how Meta’s feud with the press will evolve. If the company doubles down on its attacks, it risks alienating not just journalists but also the public that relies on them for unbiased reporting.
For now, the trial is a vivid reminder of the power struggles shaping our digital world. It’s not just about Meta’s business model—it’s about who gets to tell the story of tech’s giants and how those stories influence policy, markets, and society.
Stay Tuned with Noyzy News
The Meta antitrust saga is far from over, and Noyzy News will keep you in the loop with fresh updates and bold takes. Want to dive deeper into the clash between Big Tech and the press? Drop your thoughts in the comments or follow us for more stories that cut through the noise. This is Noyzy News, where we bring the heat and keep it real.