Reports of Facebook's Immortality Are Greatly Exaggerated
Critics have said for years that Facebook is a monopoly that can only be killed by federal regulation. Meanwhile, the platform bleeds users, its stock price is plummeting, and it just announced its first-ever round of layoffs.

Last month Elon Musk, the world's richest man, made good on his long-postponed pledge to purchase Twitter. Musk's initial offer in April renewed bipartisan criticism of tech companies. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) blasted the proposal as "dangerous for our democracy" and called for "strong rules to hold Big Tech accountable."
The episode evokes the many calls over the years to rein in Facebook, one of the other giants of Big Tech. With that in mind, it's worth revisiting some of those doom-and-gloom prognostications and seeing how things turned out.
Not mincing words, in 2019 the Open Society Foundations published an op-ed titled "Facebook's Monopoly Power Threatens Democracy Itself." Referencing founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg's then-recent appearance before the House Financial Services Committee, the philanthropic organization said the platform "undermine[s] supporting the growth and development of inclusive and accountable democracies." It worried that "the immense and unchecked power of these platforms has become untenable."
Writing in Vice last year, tech activist Evan Greer warned the government, "Restore Net Neutrality, Or Facebook Will Dominate The Internet Forever." Greer called on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reinstate net neutrality, a government regulatory structure that requires internet service providers to treat all online content the same. Without net neutrality, Greer contends, "it's only a matter of time before incumbent giants like Facebook, YouTube, and Amazon cut anti-competitive deals with internet service providers like Verizon and AT&T to prioritize their services, or exempt them from arbitrary (and unfair) data caps." In the absence of federal regulation, "we'll be stuck eating whatever the Mark Zuckerbergs of the world decide to serve up—forever."
In December 2020, the attorneys general of 46 U.S. states, plus Guam and the District of Columbia, filed an antitrust suit against Facebook. Announcing the suit, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser said, "Facebook's dominance in the social network marketplace can only be challenged once its anticompetitive actions have been addressed and remedied, thereby enabling both consumers and innovators to benefit from competition."
Such allegations are nearly as old as Facebook itself. Wired contended in 2012, "Troublesome corporate behavior is easier to swallow when there are other choices out there, when you have the option to take your business to another store down the street. But when one company owns the whole street, each little transgression is amplified." The headline wondered, "Can Anything Take Down the Facebook Juggernaut?"
Meanwhile, how have things actually worked out for Facebook in the last few years?
Between 2017 and 2019, while it still added users overall, younger users left the platform in droves: The share of 12–to–34-year-olds using Facebook fell from 79 to 62 percent, leading Forbes to speculate "it's on the road to becoming social media's retirement home."
Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen's leaked internal documents may have contained very little new information, but they did reveal the company's internal desperation over plummeting user engagement among younger people, the exact same demographic on which it built its early growth.
In October 2021, Facebook's parent company rebranded itself as Meta, indicating its intent to branch out into the virtual reality metaverse. Zuckerberg has signaled a willingness to spend $100 billion or more on the project. In the year since, the company lost half a million users in a single quarter and posted its first-ever quarterly revenue decline, and its stock price has lost nearly 75 percent of its value. This week, Meta announced its first-ever round of layoffs, in which it would cut 13 percent of its workforce and implement a hiring freeze, citing increased expenditures and lower revenues.
Meanwhile, last month the company excitedly announced that virtual reality users' avatars would now have legs, before later admitting that its technology was not leg-ready quite yet.
Tech companies pursue "disruption" as the ultimate goal, completely upending established methods and practices for sleek, modern innovations; Facebook's early motto was "move fast and break things." But disruptions are not permanent. Facebook and the other Big Tech giants achieved massive success chasing a spirit of "innovate or die," but that ethos is a double-edged sword: If those once-revolutionary companies become part of a stodgy establishment, then an enterprising startup pursuing that exact same ethos can supplant them in exactly the same way.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
So.... nothing about DHS telling this 'private company' who to ban?
That's a different problem.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, i’m now creating over $35000 dollars each month simply (ins-06) by doing a simple job online! i do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
Just open the link———————————————>>> http://Www.RichApp1.Com
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> ???.????????.???
So if Facebook is failing, is democracy safe?
Democracy died when Musk charged ENB 8 bucks a month.
Musk should make an OnlyFans account, and only give bout Blue Checkmarks to people who subscribe. In exchange for a Musk Dick Pic, you get a blue checkmark. ENB's head would explode.
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..
HERE====)> ???.????????????.???
Hopefully. Did you guys see this?
Facebook Fined $25M for Violating State Campaign Law
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vthi1KI9dbQ
They were found in violation of the law 800+ times in a single court case and fined the maximum amount of ~ $30k per offense.
That's just once case in one state.
When people talk about monopolies I ask them when they last shopped at Sears.
Woolworths.
Moths may fly out of my wallet but I don't fart dust.
Made a long distance call.
Awwww. That's cute. You think monopolies only exist if they last forever.
A quick bit of reading for you.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/monopolymarket.asp#:~:text=A%20monopoly%20describes%20a%20market,and%20ant%2Dtrust%20laws%20apply.
JesseAz: "That's not what you (or a word) look like, you faker. I've got a picture here. This is what you look like. I don't care if it's twenty years old, this is what you're supposed to look like! Liar! Liar!"
Umm no. You demonstrated a clear lack of understanding on what a monopoly is. I tried to help you out.
You just proved my point. Thanks.
He really should thank you for being nice enough to straighten him out.
The whooshing noise was my point going over your head. You know, it's really sad that you're so hateful. If you didn't know math and I said one plus one equals two you'd deny it as a matter of principle. So sad. So very sad. Sad.
Tissue?
Tragically obtuse people do bring a tear to my eye. Thanks.
Actually, Sears was not a monopoly. But the point is still well taken.
A better example would have been Standard Oil.
Which was a great investment.
Neither is Facebook, or Amazon, or most of the other so-called "monopolies" of our age.
guess the bonus is Fuckerberg has fewer fake monies to dedicate to election fortification
Aw shucks
Things are tough for Zucks
Now he has less bucks
And we give zero fucks
They did it to themselves by making it an uncomfortable and unfun place to communicate with maybe friends.
And I can point to the exact moment it happened:
In the long, long ago, an article or picture would display a couple messages below it, and these were always the comments with the most likes.
Then they changed it to show the comments with the most RESPONSES.
So instead of a cute picture of a kitty with a couple "SO CUTE!" or "I LOVE KITTY!" comments, you see comments that everybody hated -- "I want to put that kitty in a bag and drown it."
Of course, that makes you angry, so you sit down and write a scathing comment about what an idiot the poster is......
And handing out warnings for comments like this:
Staying one step ahead of the Facebook Gestapo
I made that exact quip in response to someone else getting a warning in a group over another comment. Somehow, I got a warning over that, but jihadi videos are ok.
Covid notices and suspensions for discussions on semi-private conversations went over the line for me.
“I want to put that kitty in a bag and drown it.”
? Like.
~~scathing comment on idiot poster
They got rid of online game posts and they immediately got replaced with reposted click bait news and memes.
The big loss is the failure of Meta (the virtual reality shit). Company is realizing that no one wants Meta (the virtual reality shit). Meanwhile the social media site is still doing well. Kids never did like it, it was always mostly boomers and GenXers.
The main draw is that it gets you a bubble where you can complain about all the other bubbles and how Facebook is persecuting you. Also pics of kittens and grandkids.
My current feed is eveyrone telling me they're leaving Twitter for Mammoth. I don't get it, just post your bumpersticker slogans on FB instead. Whatever. I don't understand people who use Twitter.
“My current feed is eveyrone telling me they’re leaving Twitter for Mammoth. I don’t get it,”
They probably mean Mastodon, Twitter is like one server owned by one man. Mastodon is thousands of servers owned by thousands of people. Centralized network vs. decentralized. Mastodon is not as easy to use as Twitter and typically intolerant of trollish behavior, so many Twitter users will likely return to Twitter where they can have their data mined and abuse each other under Musk’s free speech loving gaze.
“Whatever. I don’t understand people who use Twitter.”
Sometimes Twitter has been worth a look. Natural disasters, breaking news stories and distant conflicts (like hurricanes, shootings, Gaza) all have their place on Twitter and user contributions offer a different perspective than traditional media.
Mastodon is not as easy to use as Twitter and typically intolerant of trollish behavior
If it's decentralized, who's doing the good-faith moderation?
It's not. It's done by whomever owns the server.
And the fediverse is not nearly as "intolerant" of trollish behavior as mtrueman makes it sound. One Jewish guy who went over to Mastadon yeeted right back to Twitter about 48 hours after a bunch of trolls posted Hitler pics at him and told him to jump in a gas chamber. It's actually a lot closer to early 2010s-era Twitter in terms of engagement than people realize.
The people who run the server can do the moderation according to their taste and how much time and effort they want to devote to the project. I imagine it's a thankless task and can get tedious pretty fast.
The users can block other users and servers if they wish.
Sometimes Twitter has been worth a look. Natural disasters, breaking news stories and distant conflicts (like hurricanes, shootings, Gaza) all have their place on Twitter and user contributions offer a different perspective than traditional media.
Promoting election deniers in Egypt...
Fb is taboo - like buying Chinese. It’s just bad taste. And it always disappoints.
providence! guess what? others’ info equals cash. room in hell waiting.
edit: dang was response to Ted AKA above
Reason created this strawman with Twitter too. Who is arguing these companies are immortal?
This seems to be their go to strawman to excuse them working with government, pushing censorship, acting in a monopolistic actions through collusion against competitors, etc.
Reason, you're allowed to right actual articles with content.
Reason, you’re allowed to right actual articles with content.
But apparently not mandatory.
Bring back MySpace!!
My only experience with MySpace was a bit disturbing. It had to been 2009 or so. A coworker had been using MySpace and had a page there. A fellow coworker and I checked it out one day, curious as we had never been on MySpace before. We looked, and quickly wished we had not. This was a guy with a wife, two kids, and a regular churchgoer (wife's church), but the page was anything but. It was on the risque side so to speak.
I found out my wife had a boyfriend on Facebook. Kinda lost interest after that.
I found out my wife had a boyfriend on Facebook.
Yeah, that sounds about right.
What's Friendster, chopped liver?
And TheGlobe.com?
"excuse them working with government"
One of the platforms growing at Facebook's expense is Tik Tok, a Chinese outfit made famous when Trump tried to shut it down for, I shit you not, reasons of 'national security.'
You mean the Biden Administration.
TikTok Seen Moving Toward U.S. Security Deal, but Hurdles Remain A draft agreement with the Biden administration to keep the Chinese-owned video app operating in the United States is under review. That could mean more wrangling.
"You mean the Biden Administration."
6 of 1 half dozen of the other. Meet the new boss...
Yeah, you definitely meant the Biden Administration.
Who is arguing these companies are immortal?
Lot’s of people. The people who complained about malls. The people who complained about AOL. The people who complain about Amazon. The people who complain about Walmart building warehouses to compete with Amazon.
Whenever a company is really good at something, people cry “monopoly!” when that’s not what the word means.
Edit: Reference my asshole comment above where I say you're arguing over what a word means. Words mean what people agree that they mean. Books don't always keep up. People see what they think is a monopoly and they feel like it is immortal.
This is the part where you ignore what I said and attack me personally. *yawn*
Lots of people? Cite one.
Do you ever talk to anyone outside your social circle? I start conversations with strangers. It’s a hobby of mine. And I learn a lot. Like most people think the biggest store selling lots of stuff is a monopoly. It’s not what the word means on paper. But it’s what it means when they talk to each other.
Unlike you I’m not a dick who goes into a room and starts correcting everyone, telling them they’re fucking stupid morons for not knowing what the dictionary says about some word, and then go on about how superior I am.
Oh, you don’t do that?
Why do you do it here?
Edit: Cue the shrill WHATABOUT WHEN YOU
So it appears you define ‘a lot of people’ as whoever you manage to bother on the street?
I'm sorry you don't have any friends.
Lots of people? Cite one.
He says, "people who complain about Walmart building warehouses to compete [emphasis added] with Amazon" right after a post about how he discovered his wife was cheating on him on FB.
"Lots of people." is sounding more and more like, "Some of the people who live in the group home and rode the short bus with me to school."
"Whenever a company is really good at something, people cry “monopoly!” when that’s not what the word means."
Hasselblad is very good at making cameras, but nobody cries monopoly. Things are changing now, but for a while Facebook raked in more than 90% of the advertising dollars in social media, world wide. Google is in a similar position wrt internet search.
Some say Google is a monopoly.
Because they dominate internet search and the related advertising revenue.
Words mean what they communicate. When you say socialism really means government owns the means of production to someone who thinks socialism mean capitalism with lots of welfare, you're not going to have a productive conversation.
Like when I was talking online about school choice with this lib woman who was totally onboard until she figure out that choice didn't mean abortion. She was cool with kids getting abortions in school and horrified by the idea that parents could choose where their kids are schooled.
Need to agree on terms before a worthwhile conversation.
"Need to agree on terms before a worthwhile conversation."
Monopoly has nothing to do with the quality of the products a company produces. It's about dominating the market. Not necessarily complete and total domination, but close enough. Consult your family economist for more details.
Could it maybe have something to do with the fact that FB is balls-deep in government collusion? Zuck admitted the FBI told him to dial down the Hunter story, so he did it.
Facebook dying is the market in action.
"Could it maybe have something to do with the fact that FB is balls-deep in government collusion?"
Tik Tok colludes undoubtedly more deeply with the Chinese government and has been picking up many of FB's users. Sorry, no is the simple answer to your question.
It still distorts what consumers want, even if it isn't a simple yes/no.
Governments collude with companies all the time. It seems people take it for granted. The idea that people would abandon FB because of it's involvement with the US government only to take up with Tik Tok, a competitor involved more deeply still with the Chinese government, it's so obviously wrong you should have understood on my first post, rather than having me spell it out a second time for you.
The Biden Administration is working on that. They realized that when Jen Psaki looked up Tik Tok in the yellow pages to get them to start policing COVID misinformation, they just got a recording in Chinese they didn't understand. That can't continue. How do you put pressure on a Chinese company?
" How do you put pressure on a Chinese company?"
Consult your family acupuncturist. They know all the pressure points.
That's because the people that say such things live in a fantasy world passed down through the generations.
Cynically wondering if lawyers from the left will sue Facebook for announcing layoffs like they did Twitter ... I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that's unlikely...
I mean Zuck's one of their own!
The design of the best methods for processing the mock is based on the prospect of changes in the local climate, dragonfly startup. The maximum automation of environmental control provides the best possible quality of soil suitable for grown plants.
Not so sure that the self-inflicted gunshot wound that Facebook did to themselves is 'proof' they aren't 'really a monopoly' but then again does anyone even give a flying fuck if they do have a monopoly on...what exactly is their business again? Selling user information? Advertising? Something something underpants profit?
That is underpants something something HUGE profits.
I still contend that the real story here isn't how much valuation Facebook lost, but why there were ever valued as high as they were. They're probably a $100mm company. At best. And that worth is based on the whims of an incredible fickle marketplace. So even if their revenues were massive... investors should have baked in the reality that the social-networking audience has the attention span of a retarded field mouse.
"Sure, you made a billion dollars in net profit this year, but next year, your audience will have moved on to The Current Thing, and that Thing won't be you."
I can sum it up in the immortal words of Mark Hanna (besides, "You gotta pump those numbers up":
"Fugayzi, fugazi. It's a whazy. It's a woozie. It's fairy dust. It doesn't exist. It's never landed. It is no matter. It's not on the elemental chart. It's not fucking real."
Your motto is "Move fast and break things." and you wanna convince me your product works and that I should invest for the future payout?
Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen
LOL, stop. That bitch might as well have had a sign around her stating, "this is a worked shoot."
Social media platforms have a reverse network effect beyond a certain point. There is such a thing as network effect for the revenue side of their biz (advertisers seriously want global ad buys). But there is no such thing as global community so content moderation and community management expenses spiral out of control once the 'community' goes beyond the scale where the people there actually begin to dislike larger portions of it.
That doesn't mean however that 'the market' will have a solution to this via competition or innovation. The only solution is to scale down the communities so that they are focused and can rely on revenues that go way beyond ad spending. Which means that platforms will simply have to become tools and/or protocols. And unfortunately those social media platform companies already killed off or castrated those efforts towards making those features tools or protocols.
I personally hope Facebook dies completely. I've never really wished to do anything personally with facebook, but that was cemented when it started requiring non-facebook users to either have an account or not see much of any facebook site, no matter how public it is - and I am NOT giving facebook any personal information, as it requires to have an account. As of not too long ago, they upped that insult even more - you now can't see any facebook page at all without having an account. This burns my ass because 1) any on-line search item that links to a facebook page is completely useless to me and 2) some businesses only have a facebook page, which means non facebook users have been completely cut off from these businesses on line. All so they can get people to give them personal information we don't want to give out. As I said, I hope facebook has the firery, cataclysmic death it so richly deserves.
I agree that they're trying to recover what's been dead for a while already, and it would be better for them to just come up with something new. There are many great developers like https://weassemble.team/hire-developers/hire-vuejs-developers/ that can help with that, so I don't think there should be any problems with that.