📰 "Buy, Bury, Billions: Meta’s Monopoly Trial Opens Under Trump’s Watchful Eye"

If you can’t beat them — buy them. And if that fails, remind Washington you’re the app that delivers cat videos, grandma’s messages, and political disinformation in one convenient feed.

💬 “They decided that competition was too hard and it would be easier to buy out their rivals than to compete with them,”

— Daniel Matheson, lead F.T.C. litigator

📉 The Setup: Zuckerberg’s Shopping Spree
Once upon a fiscal quarter, Meta didn’t just connect friends — it acquired them. Instagram? Bought. WhatsApp? Bought. TikTok? Annoyingly Chinese. With every purchase, the moat around Zuckerberg’s empire grew wider, filled not with water, but with user data and antitrust red flags.

⚖️ The Lawsuit: A Monopoly With a Storyboard
In the opening round of "F.T.C. vs Meta Platforms", regulators argued that Meta’s M&A strategy was less capitalism and more cartel cosplay. The government’s evidence includes a “smoking gun” email from Zuckerberg in 2012 spelling it out:

“Instagram was growing so much faster than us that we had to buy them.”

📊 The Stakes: A Broken Deal With Capitalism
The F.T.C. wants to rewind a decade of digital consolidation. Meta calls it a witch hunt — minus the witches and plus several billion dollars in valuation risk. If successful, the trial could force the divestment of Instagram and WhatsApp. If it fails, Silicon Valley gets a green light to keep treating antitrust laws as startup acquisition checklists.

🎭 The Irony: Trump’s FTC as Tech’s Exorcist
Yes, the same administration that treats regulation like a dirty word is now sending its regulators after the digital oligarchs. Because nothing says “populism” like taking a flamethrower to Big Tech — just not the ones running your campaign ads.

🤔 What happens when billionaires stop pretending to innovate and just start buying the future?

#meta #antitrust #trump2025 #oligarchy #techwars #monopolyUSA

American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

📰 Trump Unleashes Deregulated A.I. — “Free of Bias”

💬 “To secure our future, we must harness the full power of American innovation.”

— Trump, in his A.I. Action Plan

🧠 What’s new: Trump’s executive order scraps Biden-era safety standards and calls for ideologically “neutral” A.I.

🚨 Driving the news:
• Mentions of diversity, climate, and misinformation were stripped from A.I. guidance.
• Federal funds will favor firms promising “objectivity.”
• States with strict A.I. rules may lose federal tech grants.
• Copyright and data usage? Not addressed.

🌎 Geopolitical angle:
• White House aims to export American A.I. tools to counter China.
• OpenAI, Meta, and Google lobbied for tax breaks and fewer export restrictions.
• Commerce Dept. to revise risk frameworks—minus D.E.I. and climate concerns.

🧩 Why it matters:
• The U.S. is pushing for dominance without brakes.
• “Unbiased” A.I. now means: free of liberal ideology, full of surveillance potential.

🤔 Reality check:
Who defines “bias” in a system built by companies, trained on flawed data, and now politically commissioned?

#trump #AI #artificialintelligence #techpolicy #freeSpeech #openAI #meta #google

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

Meta, YouTube and the First Cracks in Big Tech’s Legal Armor

Meta and YouTube just lost the “we’re just a platform” myth in court. A jury looked at their design tricks and called them what they are: engineered addiction for kids.

In Los Angeles, jurors found Meta and YouTube negligent and awarded $3 million to a young woman, K.G.M., who said she was pulled into Instagram and YouTube as a child and ended up with anxiety and depression. Her lawyers didn’t argue about a bad post or a rogue comment; they went after the architecture — endless scroll, engagement loops, notification hooks — as a product defect, not a speech issue.

The verdict landed 24 hours after a New Mexico jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million in civil penalties for deceiving parents and endangering children, finding the company put profits over safety and misled the public about harms. Two juries, two states, same message: Section 230 won’t save you if the claim is “you built an addiction machine,” not “someone posted something nasty.”

And this is only the opening salvo. There are more than 2,400 similar cases pending in federal litigation against Meta, Google, TikTok and Snap, brought by teens, parents, school districts and attorneys general all arguing the same core point: the harm is in the design, not just the content. Silicon Valley thought it had legal armor; what it actually has is a growing line of juries ready to test how much that armor is really worth.

#meta #youtube #socialmedia #addiction #lawsuits #kids #bigtech

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

⚖️ Mark Zuckerberg On Trial: New Mexico Against Meta

A New Mexico court has ordered Meta, the parent company of Facebook, to pay $567m into a fund aimed at redressing adverse mental health impacts from the social media giant’s platforms.

The Thursday ruling comes as a part of the second phase of a landmark trial the social media giant lost in March.

At the time, a jury found that the company knowingly harmed children’s mental health and concealed what it knew about child sexual exploitation on its platforms, and imposed the maximum penalty: a $375m fine.

The ruling on Thursday an additional to that fine, bringing the total amount Meta is responsible for to $942m.

Judge Bryan Biedscheid said the bulk of the money – $420m – would be used for treatment services for young people in New Mexico.

The rest will go toward awareness and prevention, screening services and other costs over the next five years.

The March trial was the first to find Meta liable for acts committed on its platform, and followed a 2023 WSJ investigation that revealed how Facebook and Instagram had become marketplaces for child sex trafficking.

The judge has also ordered other changes, including that Facebook and Instagram build banner and informational screens to clearly explain its protection features, best practices, and tools to address inappropriate comment.

Those changes, and an educational campaign in New Mexico, would be subject to review by the state.

The court said federal children’s privacy laws prevent Meta from applying age-verification tools to children under 13. The court also noted that ordering verification of children’s ages only for Meta and not other social media companies would be “inequitable and unduly injurious” to the company.

Instead, the court ordered Meta to continue to improve its age-assurance tools in New Mexico, which include using artificial intelligence to determine people’s age based on signals such as who their friends are and what types of content they post and consume.

Meta must also attempt to develop a dedicated “under-13-years-of-age prediction model” in the next two years.

Additionally, Meta should also request proof of age for Instagram and Facebook users in New Mexico it estimates to be under 13. If it determines a user to be under 13, or under 18 but without being able to estimate a specific age, Meta must treat the user as under 13 or under 18 until the user verifies their age.

The company must also partner with schools or a child safety organization to create a reporting portal where school staff can flag users who may be under 13.

And it must delete personal information it has collected on users under 13. The court also ordered Meta to report on its progress twice a year on how it is complying with the abatement measures.

New Mexico attorney general Raúl Torrez hailed the judgment.

“This case has always been about protecting children, standing up for families, and making sure that one of the world’s largest technology companies cannot profit from practices that endanger young people without consequence,” Torrez said in a statement.

“Today’s decision is a victory for every parent who has worried about what social media is doing to their child and every child who deserves to grow up safer online.”

“We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and have been transparent about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors and harmful content.

We remain confident in our record of protecting teens online and will continue to defend ourselves against claims that misrepresent the facts,” the statement continued.

The total amount Meta is responsible for is a small fraction of its annual profit, which was about $60bn in 2025. Still, it represents another setback for Meta as it faces a wave of accusations from families of children harmed by social media.

#trial #meta #zuckerberg #new #mexico

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

Meta’s AI Tax Bonanza: Billions Saved as Washington Pays the Bill


Meta is pouring billions of dollars into the infrastructure behind the artificial-intelligence boom. At the same time, the company has found a powerful way to reduce its federal tax bill: using tax incentives designed to encourage investment in research, development and capital infrastructure.

The result is striking. Meta reported a federal income-tax rate of just over 3.5% for 2025, its lowest rate since Facebook went public. Its federal tax bill fell to roughly $2.8 billion, compared with about $9.6 billion the previous year, even as its domestic profits climbed to roughly $79.6 billion.

Meta is not alone. Amazon and Alphabet also reported sharply lower tax bills as they accelerated spending on AI infrastructure, servers, chips and data centers.

Amazon’s federal tax bill fell from about $9 billion in 2024 to roughly $1.2 billion in 2025, while Alphabet’s combined federal and state tax figure declined from about $21.1 billion to $13.8 billion.

Much of the change is linked to the tax legislation signed by President Donald Trump in 2025. The law expanded or restored deductions allowing companies to write off certain capital investments and research expenses more quickly. For technology companies racing to build enormous AI computing networks, those provisions can translate into billions of dollars in tax savings or deferred payments.

Meta’s AI expansion is therefore doing double duty: increasing the company’s computing capacity while generating expenses that can reduce its taxable income.

There is, however, an important distinction. Lower taxes today do not necessarily mean those taxes disappear forever. Some provisions effectively push tax payments into future years. Meta reported more than $18 billion in deferred taxes for 2025.

Supporters argue that accelerated deductions encourage companies to invest in American technology, infrastructure and research rather than shifting those investments overseas. Critics counter that the incentives are increasingly benefiting some of the world’s most profitable corporations on a massive scale.

The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy estimates that Meta, Amazon and Alphabet collectively reduced their federal tax payments by nearly $50 billion in 2025 compared with what they would have owed at the statutory 21% corporate rate.

That is an advocacy group’s calculation, rather than an amount determined by the IRS.

The controversy is about more than accounting. AI data centers have become one of the biggest engines of corporate investment, with individual facilities costing billions of dollars. They also consume enormous amounts of electricity and, depending on their cooling systems, significant quantities of water.

That leaves Washington facing a difficult question: when Congress creates tax breaks to stimulate innovation, where is the line between encouraging investment and subsidizing the expansion of already enormously profitable technology companies?

For Meta, the answer is increasingly visible in its balance sheet. The company is spending aggressively on AI — and the tax code is helping make that expansion substantially cheaper.

#Meta #ArtificialIntelligence #BigTech #Taxes

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events🇺🇸