
Tech titans clash over scraps of limited time
NEW YORK, May 27 (Reuters Breakingviews) - Any smartphone is a window to a jostling crowd of apps: Meta Platforms' (META.O), opens new tab Facebook and Instagram, Alphabet's (GOOGL.O), opens new tab YouTube, Apple's (AAPL.O), opens new tab messaging service, and so on. The only constraint is the number of minutes in a day each user has to give them - a limit against which they appear to be straining. The U.S. government's lawsuit seeking to break up Meta helps to illustrate how this overstuffed colosseum has no room for new challengers unless old ones make way. Technology titans' battle to keep a hold of eyeballs is more perilously changeable than it may seem.
Trustbusters at the Federal Trade Commission allege that Mark Zuckerberg's empire stifled competition in a 'buy-or-bury strategy' as they push to unwind its acquisitions of photo-sharing app Instagram and messaging service WhatsApp. As is the way of such cases, much of the legal argument comes down to who exactly Meta competes with: select a narrow group, and its market dominance looks unassailable; expand the list, and Facebook might seem a drop in the bucket. The interesting result of this exercise is that it shows just how delicately balanced each app's hold on user attention is.
Take the government's line, for instance. The FTC argues that Meta's rivals are limited to the likes of disappearing-photos app Snap (SNAP.N), opens new tab and a privacy-based social network with 20 million users called MeWe. Under this definition, Meta's share of user time spent is a whopping 85%.
View the world like the $1.7 trillion social media giant's legal team, though, and it looks very different. When adding TikTok to the mix, Meta's share drops to 60%. It becomes even more feeble when YouTube enters the arena, declining to 30%.
Meta's core app, Facebook, began in 2004. Snap followed in 2011, while TikTok was released in 2016. The risk is that each new entrant innovates just enough to steal away the limited minutes in a day. Take the ByteDance-owned short-form video app. In 2019, TikTok consumed, on average, over 2 minutes of each U.S. adult's day. Five years later, that number increased to almost 18 minutes, according to analysis by advisory firm Epyllion. And just as, say, the popularity of TV show 'Survivor' led broadcasters to endlessly replicate the reality-show formula as they vied for viewers, a defensive copycat pattern plays out in social media, too. Instagram and YouTube, sensing a threat, quickly embraced similar short-form video feeds. As Meta itself admitted in court, after initial disruption, every app simply begins to look the same.
The maturing of the iPhone era makes this competition more desperate. When Facebook bought Instagram for $1 billion in 2012, smartphone penetration in the United States was 45%, according to the Pew Research Center. Every day, there were plenty of people booting up a web-connected phone and peering into app stores for the first time, ready to be courted by social media platforms. By 2024, smartphone adoption rates had doubled. Home screens are now cluttered with apps.
Growth must therefore come by keeping users glued to their phones for longer, taking up more time out of their day. The decline of recreational activities in the real world implies that this has already happened. People spent 26 minutes on average each day reading in 2023, 10 fewer minutes than in 2003, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Socializing and communicating fell even more, from 78 minutes in 2003 to 57 minutes in 2023. Hanging out with friends declined as mobile phone usage rose, with starker gaps among younger cohorts. Atsushi Katsuki, chief executive of Japanese beverage group Asahi, partially blamed, opens new tab digital entertainment, including video games, for the drop-off in consumption of beers like Peroni. 'Alcohol used to occupy a much bigger share of people's entertainment and joy,' he told the Financial Times in May.
So if there are fewer new users and fewer new minutes in the day to win, platforms must instead steal time from each other. As Zuckerberg himself, opens new tab put it, when asked why he bought Instagram: 'Building a new app is hard.' Capturing people's attention is incredibly valuable, difficult to dislodge -- and immediately claimed if it is. A couple of accidental natural experiments provide handy proof.
In October 2021, Facebook and Instagram experienced a six-hour global outage. Streaming television giant Netflix (NFLX.O), opens new tab materially benefitted. The company, which cites everything from the Sandman to Fortnite as competition, said it saw a 14% pop in engagement, opens new tab during Meta's unexpected downtime. Similarly, when TikTok was briefly banned at the beginning of the year, Facebook and Instagram noted a 37% uptick in usage, according to Meta's court presentations.
Americans may have reached peak attention - at least for now. Sleep, personal hygiene, at least some socialization: all of these are likely to stay constant. One of the few places left to win time might be from the workday. The pattern of labor has changed little in the past two decades, clocking in at a little under 8 hours on average per day. Maybe, if technologists' wildest dreams for artificial intelligence are realized, this will finally start to shift. The more productive a society becomes, after all, the more time it will have to waste. Until then, the app battle royale rages on.
Follow @jennifersaba, opens new tab on X
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
6 minutes ago
- BBC News
Trump and Musk to speak from Oval Office as tech giant ends time at White House
Update: Date: 18:40 BST Title: What is the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge)? Content: Despite its full name, Doge is not an official government department, which can only be established by an act of Congress. Instead, it's an advisory body which was created by an executive order signed by US President Donald Trump. Part of Doge's mission, according to the order, relates to IT upgrades aimed at boosting efficiency. It must finish its work by July 2026. Many Doge staff appear to be young people with tech backgrounds and limited or no government experience. Musk said Doge's mission was to end the "tyranny of the bureaucracy", save taxpayers' money and reduce US national debt, which stands at $36tn (£28.9tn). The organisation's activities have included shuttering government agencies, defunding programmes and mass layoffs. Update: Date: 18:32 BST Title: Musk is 'terrific', Trump says Content: Reacting to Elon Musk's departure, US President Donald Trump called the billionaire "terrific" in a social media post on Thursday. This will be his last day, but not really, because he will, always, be with us, helping all the way. Elon is terrific! See you tomorrow at the White House." President Donald Trump Update: Date: 18:24 BST Title: It's Musk's last day - what has he achieved at the White House? Content: Bernd Debusmann JrReporting from the White House Elon Musk's time in the Trump administration is coming to an end after a tempestuous 129 days in which the world's richest person took an axe to government spending - stirring ample controversy along the way. While Musk's time in government lasted little more than four months, his work with Doge upended the federal government and had an impact not just in the halls of power in Washington - but around the world. In addition to taking a chainsaw to federal spending - and cutting some 260,000 jobs from the federal workforce - some observers have credited Musk with helping nudge the White House even further towards an "America First" world view and bringing misinformation into the Oval Office. His presence at the White House also revealed deep fissures in Trump's cabinet, and blurred the already complicated line between politics and business in the "Trump 2.0" administration. Update: Date: 18:12 BST Title: Remember, Doge savings stand at less than a tenth of the original goal Content: Gary O'DonoghueChief North America correspondent It looked as though Elon Musk's departure from government would be with more of a whimper than a bang. But the insertion late last night of this valedictory news conference looks like a testament to some residual presidential affection. Key will be the figures that will no doubt get bandied around by Musk and Trump about how much money exactly has been saved. Remember the initial goal during the campaign was two trillion dollars - almost a third of discretional federal spending. That soon became one trillion at the start of the administration - and according to Doge itself, the actual current savings stand at $175bn - less than a tenth of the original goal. Musk may also face some uncomfortable questions about his personal life and his use of prescription drugs such as Ketamine. And how will both men handle their clear disagreements over the "big, beautiful" bill - which the president vaunts and which Musk believes will add trillions to spending. Update: Date: 18:03 BST Title: White House waits for Musk's farewell Content: Bernd Debusmann JrReporting from the White House Good afternoon from the sunny White House - which has become a hub of activity ahead of Elon Musk's meeting with Donald Trump at the Oval Office. Musk's presence here is one that has long been a focus for the White House press corps. That's reflected in the amount of people trickling in at the moment, on a day in which this is really the only public event expected here. The meeting is expected to be cordial, with both men praising the work of Doge and Musk's role over the last few months. Trump has repeatedly defended Musk's role at the White House, and several months ago I had the opportunity to ask Trump about him myself on a day in which I was a member of the pool. In response to my question about Musk's future, Trump called him "brilliant" and said that he would "like to keep him for a long time". That, however, came long before Musk said that he was "disappointed" in Trump's "big, beautiful" bill - the first public sign of disagreement between the two men. Today might also see Musk questioned about reports that he was heavily using drugs during the Trump campaign, external. Earlier, the White House Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller, was asked about that as well. "The drugs that we're concerned about are the drugs running across the southern border," Miller responded. Update: Date: 18:02 BST Title: Musk announced his departure from Doge on Wednesday Content: Elon Musk announced his 'scheduled time as a special government employee' was coming to an end on his social media platform X on Wednesday. He thanked President Donald Trump for the 'opportunity to reduce wasteful spending' and announced that the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) would continue in his absence. "The Doge mission will only strengthen over time as it becomes a way of life throughout the government," the South African-born billionaire wrote. Update: Date: 18:01 BST Title: It's time for Musk to leave the White House. Not before one last swan song Content: Rachel FlynnReporting from Washington DC Tech tycoon and, until the end of the day, special government employee Elon Musk is set to speak in the Oval Office shortly, on what he says is his last day in the role. Musk's designated role allowed him to work a federal job for 130 days each year, which he began 130 days ago on Trump's inauguration. He promised to slash government spending and "waste" - we'll be analysing whether he did so successfully. His departure from the White House comes a day after he said he was "disappointed" with Trump's budget bill, which proposes multi-trillion dollar tax breaks and a boost to defence spending. Those 130 days have been full of twists, turns, and headlines - which we'll be delving into throughout our coverage. Stay with us as we look ahead to a news conference with Trump and Musk at 13:30 local time (18:30 BST) and analysis from our correspondents along the way.


The Independent
11 minutes ago
- The Independent
DHS publishes a list of 500 sanctuary cities for ‘obstructing the enforcement' of Trump's deportation plans
The Department of Homeland Security has published a list of 500 sanctuary cities it claims are ' deliberately and shamefully obstructing' the Trump administration's deportation plans. A list of sanctuary jurisdictions, which includes cities, countries and states across the U.S., was posted to the department's website Thursday as the administration increases the pressure on communities it believes are standing in the way of President Donald Trump 's mass deportations agenda. 'These sanctuary city politicians are endangering Americans and our law enforcement in order to protect violent criminal illegal aliens,' Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said. 'Sanctuary jurisdictions including cities, counties, and states that are deliberately and shamefully obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws endangering American communities,' the department said. 'Sanctuary cities protect dangerous criminal aliens from facing consequences and put law enforcement in peril.' The list was compiled using a number of factors, including whether the cities or localities identified themselves as sanctuary jurisdictions, how much they complied already with federal officials enforcing immigration laws, if they had restrictions on sharing information with immigration enforcement or had any legal protections for people in the country illegally, according to the department.


Telegraph
12 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Taylor Swift just spent millions to show the music industry who's boss
Six years, four re-recorded albums, one billion dollar-tour and headline-making break-up later, Taylor Swift finally owns the rights to her master recordings. Those not privy to the ins-and-outs of the world of Swift might not understand how big a deal this is, scoffing that it's just another way for the richest woman in music to make a few more bucks. But her fans will know better. Swift's mission to regain control of the masters of her first six albums – Taylor Swift (2006), Fearless (2008), Speak Now (2010), Red (2012), 1989 (2014) and Reputation (2017) – has been transformed from a standard business deal to a feminised David vs Goliath battle for the ages. It all began in 2019 when Swift's first record label, Big Machine, decided to sell the rights to her back catalogue to executive Scooter Braun and his company Ithaca Holdings (now Shamrock Holdings); a development she described as her 'worst case scenario' that stripped her of both creative and financial autonomy. Unable to buy her work outright, she was granted the opportunity to 'earn' back one album at a time if she continued to churn out new records for the label. And so off she toddled to rival Republic, the home of her subsequent five studio albums and four re-records (pointedly labelled 'Taylor's Versions'), safe in the knowledge her millions of fans would follow right along with her. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Taylor Swift (@taylorswift) Braun became persona non grata among Swifties, seen as a ruthless suit intent on exploiting the creative output of a young female star; Swift, after all, had been a mere teenager when she wrote and recorded her first few albums. To add insult to injury, he had at one point managed her arch-nemesis Kanye West, who, after sabotaging her acceptance speech at the 2009 VMAs, continued to target her in his music. Of course, the 19-year-old Swift who once stood on stage shaking as West reprimanded her has grown up; not only that, but in the five years since her fight to regain her masters took off, she's stopped being a regular popstar and instead become the world's most recognisable, widely adored and lucratively profitable celebrity. Back then, she was part of the music industry – today, she dominates it, and thus possesses leverage that other artists could only dream of. A letter posted on Swift's website today, scrawled in her purposefully messy, twee handwriting, declared she had officially bought back the masters from Shamrock Holdings; reports of the cost circle around the $400 million mark. 'To say this is my greatest dream come true is actually being pretty reserved about it,' she wrote. A hint at what it cost came from the line 'All I've ever wanted was the opportunity to work hard enough to be able to one day purchase my music outright with no strings attached'. And why did she want it so bad? A cynic would say it's to be able to earn more, to licence her songs and videos out for films and TV of her own accord, or perhaps to even one day sell the masters on herself (as industry titans have done before her, from Springsteen to Bowie and Stevie Nicks). A loyal Swiftie might argue it's more personal than that: she wrote those albums when she was still in school, about boys she once dated who broke her heart. I fit in both camps, on the one hand a journalist who understands that this years-long fight with Braun has made Swift infinitely more famous yet decidedly easier to root for: even a billionaire needs a sob story. On the other, a fan of 20 years, who has always brought into the idea that Swift is a different kind of popstar because of the intense emotional reaction her music provokes in the women who love her music. That depth of emotion, of personal shared experiences, made it easier to understand why she'd decided to fight this fight. The content of her music is also one of the reasons, she wrote today, why she's yet to re-record Reputation, an album that has been rumoured to be on the brink of the 'Taylor's Version' treatment since the Eras tour began in Arizona two years ago. It was a love letter to ex-boyfriend Joe Alwyn, and now, happily coupled up with NFL star Travis Kelce, it seems weird she'd revisit their relationship; she says 'it's the one album in those first six that I thought couldn't be improved upon by redoing it'. Her rerecording of her eponymous debut album, by comparison, is apparently on its way. There's an emotional and financial lesson at the heart of the whole affair that proves just how savvy a businesswoman – and artist – Swift is. Instead of whiling away the days mourning her lost albums, her decision to re-record them, manually, backed by huge marketing drives, savvy merchandise and weepy Instagram captions about how much it meant to her as a songwriter, made her into a star women suddenly found it cool to idolise. Here was someone who dared to take on the might of the music biz (the male-dominated music biz!) and look! She actually won. I'm happy she did it. Swift is one of very, very few famous people powerful enough to solicit real change; since she started her re-recordings, younger artists like Olivia Rodrigo and Zara Larsson have demanded the rights to their masters be enshrined in their contracts. It makes them richer, yes. But it also grants them a degree of control not previously afforded to artists – especially female ones. Surely that's a good thing?