Latest news with #Allensworth
Yahoo
07-06-2025
- Yahoo
Families can ride discounted trains to notable site for Black history in Valley
Amtrak will run special trains once again to a Juneteenth event in the Southern San Joaquin Valley. It will be June 14 at Allensworth, named for the former slave who founded it in 1908. The town faded after several years due to the loss of its water supply and rail depot. Amtrak sets up a temporary platform next to what is now a state historic park. All tickets are half off for the trip, then reduced even more by Amtrak's regular discounts for children, seniors and other groups. Four southbound trains will get them there before and during the gathering, which is from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m., and return afterward. The trip is on the San Joaquins corridor. It has five daily round trips between Bakersfield and Oakland and a sixth branching north to Sacramento. The stops on the way include Stockton, Modesto, Denair, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Hanford and Corcoran. Tickets can be purchased on the Amtrak website, which also has departure times. Juneteenth commemorates the day in 1865 when people in Galveston, Texas, got belated word of the Emancipation Proclamation. It is now a federal holiday on June 19 each year. The town was named for Lt. Col. Allen Allensworth, who earlier had become the highest-ranking Black officer in the U.S. Army. Few of the old buildings remain, but the state has plans for a visitor center and other amenities. The nonprofit Friends of Allensworth is helping out. Amtrak carried just 33 passengers on its first Allensworth promotion in 2019, said an email from Tom van der List of KP Public Affairs in Sacramento. Last year brought more than 350. People who prefer to drive can go south on Highway 99 to Fresno, then south on Highway 43 to Allensworth. The Amtrak rides are free this year for certain Black students in Stockton, Tracy, Bakersfield and the Bay Area, thanks to a grant from the nonprofit Parks California. The $50,000 will support current and future trips to Juneteenth and to the annual October event marking Allensworth joining the state park system in 1974. The grant money was secured with help from the route's governing body, the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority. 'This grant will help elevate and expand the Visit Allensworth program, while allowing travelers to experience the benefits of public transportation through Amtrak San Joaquins,' Executive Director Stacey Mortensen said in a news release. She added that it 'will reduce access barriers to this historically and culturally significant site, allowing Black communities throughout our service corridor to connect with this cornerstone of California's rich history.' Some of the other passengers will be from a service club in Modesto. The Silver Square Lodge #66/Creators Club is calling it the 'Never Be Forgotten, Never Be Repeated Train Ride Back In Time.' More information is at 209-595-6966 or on the group's Facebook page. The Bee has details on Juneteenth observances in Modesto, Riverbank and Lathrop as part of a roundup of various events this month.
Black America Web
08-05-2025
- General
- Black America Web
The Downfall Of Allensworth: How Racism And Lies Destroyed A Black Town In California
Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE Source: creative services / iOne Digital A lmost 70 miles south of Fresno, California, tucked away in the small county of Tulare is a tiny state park. Although it may not look like much, it was once a true testament to Black American resilience. MORE: The Black Town Under Lake Martin: A Father & Son's Dream Of Greatness How do you get a whole race of people to uplift themselves after years of persecution? This was the very question Colonel Allen Allensworth asked himself before he embarked on one of the most important journeys in African American history–to build the first Black self-sufficient town in California. Sadly, that journey would never get to live up to its full potential. Like so many other symbols of Black excellence in the early 1900s, Allensworth's dream would be poisoned by racism's venomous sting. Colonel Allensworth was an American hero in every sense of the word and his story doesn't get told nearly enough. But this is Black Folklore, where we dive into America's past to tell lesser-known Black stories that touch the soul. And yes, many of our stories end in tragedy, but that doesn't make them any less inspiring. There's value in understanding what came before you. Here is the amazing and tragic story of Allensworth, the only California town to be founded, financed, and governed by Black people. Source: Fresno Bee / Getty In 1842, Allen Allensworth was born a slave in Louisville, Kentucky, twenty years before the start of the Civil War. The young boy would spend his entire childhood the property of a white slave owner. Slaves in Kentucky were forbidden from education in fear of rebellion or uprising. In secret, Allensworth would master the English language, learning to read and write and cultivate a love for learning. But the only way he would truly be able to express this newfound love was to escape his bondage. The first time Allen Allensworth tried to escape slavery he failed miserably. Although there is no record of his escape, there are a few bread crumbs from history we can follow to paint a picture. In 1806, the Louisville Police department began to take shape in the form of five 'watchmen' appointed by the town's trustees. In the south police forces, we created solely to preserve the system of slavery. It isn't out of the question to believe that Allensworth was caught by the police and returned to his slave owner, who probably greeted him with a few lashings from the whip. But it wouldn't deter Allensworth. The start of the Civil War in 1861 would give him the opportunity he needed to run and never look back. He escaped slavery in 1862, seeking refuge behind Union lines. For the next several months, Allensworth would work as a civilian nurse for the 44th Illinois volunteer Infantry, until 1863 when become a seaman in the Union Navy serving on gunboats. When he left the Navy in 1865 with the rank of first-class petty officer, Allensworth leaned into the word of God and enrolled at Roger Williams University to study theology. While learning how to spread the gospel, he also met and married the love of his life, Josephine Leavell. After becoming an ordained minister, Allensworth jumped right into the pulpit. He began giving serval sermons around his hometown of Louisville and became an instant success. The community began to look up to him and it propelled him into politics. In 1880 and 1884, Allensworth would represent Kentucky as one of their delegates to the Republic National convention. Allensworth's life had changed so much since his time in the Navy, but his heart was still with the soldiers. In 1882 he was tasked to help recruit Black chaplains for the all-Black military units. Instead of recruiting Black pastors, Allensworth took the position himself. He believed as a chaplain he could make the lives of the average Black soldier much better. For twenty years, Allensworth taught Black soldiers about spiritual health and educational well-being. He was only the second African American, after Henry Plummer, named to serve as a U.S. Army Chaplain. In 1906 he retired from the Army as the highest-ranked Black man in the U.S. Armed Forces. Retirement didn't slow Allensworth down one bit. After his second stint in the army, the former slave turned Colonel traveled the U.S. lecturing Blacks on the importance of self-help programs. Like Booker T. Washington, Allensworth believed Blacks in America needed to become more self-sufficient. But, if Blacks were going to stand on their own in America, they needed a safe place to do so–Allensworth wanted to provide that. Following his own advice, he moved to Los Angeles with his family in search of California. Allensworth believed he could build a town dedicated to the prosperity of Black Americans. There weren't many places Black people could live that allowed them to escape the clutches of Jim Crown, even in the north. But California was a new land, with hope and opportunity. All Allensworth needed now was a team. Insert William Payne, a professor at West Virginia Colored Institute, Dr, William H. Peck, a Los Angeles minister, and J.W. Palmer, a Nevada miner. Then men searched far and wide for the right plot of land until Allensworth decided on an area in southwest Tulare County. The land seemed to have an abundance of water and rich soil. Source: Fresno Bee / Getty On August 3, 1908, the all-Black town of Solito was born. Later that year the townspeople would change the name to Allensworth in honor of its most important founder. The town of Allensworth was a true gem and was far ahead of its time. It not only had a depot connection on the Santa Fe Railroad but also had an official town government called the Allensworth Progressive Association. The town held elections, as well as regularly scheduled town meetings. Allensworth was also a voting precinct and had its own school district, with a local school built with money raised by the community. The school included students from elementary to high school. Since Allensworth prided itself on the importance of education, the town's extracurricular activities were centered around the advancement of the Black mind. The town had a Women's Improvement League and boasted a Debating Society, a Theatre Club, and a Glee Club. The town thrived off of its agriculture. Allensworth's economy was built around the farmers who lived in the surrounding areas. Allensworth had serval businesses including a bakery, a drug store, a barbershop, a machine shop, as well as a hotel. Unfortunately, the rest of this story is more of a Greek tragedy than it is a fairytale. In 1914, Allen Allensworth was killed after he was hit by a motorcycle during a trip to Los Angeles. The town was devastated but continued to prosper. By the 1920s there were more than 300 residents that lived in Allensworth. It attracted Black soldiers, Black educators, and Black thinkers from all over the country. But the town of Allensworth never made it. Its biggest downfall, being a Black self-sufficient town in a white racist country. For Allensworth to continue to blossom, it needed support from the surrounding white establishments, but that was far from the case. The Pacific Farming Company controlled most of the land sales in the state. They frequently sold plots of land to Blacks at inflated prices and even refused land sales to Blacks after Allensworth began to boom. The Pacific Water Company lied to Allensworth's elected officials, promising the town the addition of water wells due to the lack of sustainable water sources. Instead of adding the water wells in Allensworth, they installed the wells in the neighboring white town, leaving Allensworth's unusable. Townspeople pleaded with the company to keep their promises and add the necessary wells, but the Pacific Water Company ignored their pleas. The long legal battle would end in a loss for the townspeople. Since agriculture was so important to the way of life in Allensworth, once the water went, so did the residents. The Santa Fe Railroad would also follow suit in helping to quickly destroy the popular Black town of Allensworth. They suspended the connecting rail line and diverted it to a neighboring all-white town. With no water to farm and no transportation to grow, Allensworth ultimately became a ghost town, gone forever but most certainly not forgotten. Today, in the place that once represented Black resilience, sits the Colonel Allensworth State Historic Park. The park works to continue the legacy of Allensworth and the ideals that Allen lived by. The organization Friends Of Allensworth also allows you to help promote the town's legacy. It was created to raise awareness of the town of Allensworth, as well as to grow support for the park. If you would like to support the park click here. How do you get a whole race of people to uplift themselves after years of persecution? You give them direction and show them anything can be achieved with determination and confidence in yourself. That was Colonel Allensworth's true legacy 'Progress in human affairs is more often a pull than a push, surging forward of the exceptional man, and the lifting of his duller brethren slowly and painfully to his vantage-ground.' – W.E.B. Du Bois SEE ALSO: The Legend Of O.T. Jackson And The Black Ghost Town Of Dearfield, Colorado There's A Black Village Under Central Park That Was Founded By Alexander Hamilton's Secret Black Son SEE ALSO The Downfall Of Allensworth: How Racism And Lies Destroyed A Black Town In California was originally published on
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Google's multibillion-dollar search engine deal with Apple at high risk in monopoly case
A judge will likely target Google's search deals with Apple to address its monopoly, experts said. Google and the DOJ are facing off in a court hearing to determine remedies to its search monopoly. As part of its proposed remedies, the DOJ wants the judge to force Google to sell off Chrome. A federal judge will almost certainly target Google's multibillion dollar search engine deals with Apple and other companies as part of a way to remedy the tech empire's illegal online search monopoly, antitrust experts said. On Monday, Google and the Department of Justice began an expected three-week-long court battle in Washington, DC, that could result in a massive shake up of the $1.8 trillion tech behemoth. US District Judge Amit Mehta will ultimately determine Google's fate following the so-called remedies phase of the landmark case. Mehta ruled in August that Google violated US antitrust law in maintaining a monopoly with its online search business. If the DOJ gets its way, Google could be forced to sell off its key Chrome web browser, end its exclusive deals with Apple, Mozilla, Samsung and others to make Google the default search engine on web browsers and smartphones, and share search data with rivals. The DOJ also wants the court to force Google to break off its Android mobile operating system if the search market doesn't experience an increase in competition through its sweeping proposed fixes. Experts in antitrust law told Business Insider that Mehta will most likely rule for Google to end its multibillion dollar deals with companies, including Apple, to be the default search engine on their devices and browsers. "The judge is almost certainly going to order Google to stop paying for exclusive default status," said Rebecca Haw Allensworth, a law professor at Tennessee's Vanderbilt University. "But I don't think we know what exclusive default status means yet." Allensworth called it a "toss up" on whether the judge will force Google to divest Chrome. Requiring Google to sell off Chrome would be the "worst case scenario" for the company, said Allensworth. "Divestiture remedies are seen as pretty strong medicine," Allensworth said, adding that a break up remedy "isn't very closely related to the behavior at issue in this case." No matter what, Allensworth said she believes there will be what's called a behavioral remedy for Google, which would mean the judge will require Google to change how it arranges its contracts with distributors like Apple. "I think we just don't know exactly how that's going to be designed," she said. Additionally, Allensworth said it would be very unlikely that the judge would order Google to divest both Chrome and Android. Back in 2023, when the antitrust case went to trial, it was revealed in court that in 2021 Google paid companies more than $26 billion for the search placement deals. In 2022, Google paid Apple a whopping $20 billion to secure itself as the default search engine on the company's Safari browser, the DOJ said. At trial, the judge made a "big deal" about the fact that Google had paid Apple billions, "saying why would they do so if it didn't lock users in," said George Hay, a professor at Cornell Law School and former chief economist for the Justice Department's antitrust division. "He clearly believed that the payment had that effect," Hay said, adding that eliminating the agreement "is the most straightforward way to try to set things right." The DOJ, he said, will likely argue that's not enough, though. Nicholas Reese, an adjunct professor at New York University, said that Google's exclusivity deals with Apple and other companies "have been close to the smoking gun for DOJ and other critics because they allegedly show naked attempts to control the market and neutralize competition." Reese noted the DOJ "went big" in the remedies that it is seeking for Google, but said that getting them all would probably "surprise" the government. "I would stop short of saying we will see every remedy sought by DOJ ordered, but I do believe it will be significant," he said. Hay told BI that by asking the judge for as much as it did, the DOJ is "inviting Google to confirm that something less draconian will work." "Google of course says it wants almost no remedy," he said. The judge is expected to issue his remedies ruling by the end of the summer. Google has vowed to appeal Mehta's ruling in which he declared the tech giant a monopolist. It could be years before there's a final outcome. Syracuse University law professor Shubha Ghosh told BI that the more drastic a remedy that gets imposed, "the more likely it'll get reversed on appeal." In an opening statement on Monday, Google lawyer John Schmidtlein called the DOJ's proposal of remedies "a wish list for competitors looking to get the benefits of Google's extraordinary innovations and trade secrets that we've spent decades developing," The New York Times reported. Google's vice president for regulatory affairs Lee-Anne Mulholland said the government's proposal was "unnecessary and harmful" in a blog post ahead of the start of the hearing. The DOJ's proposal would make it more difficult for people to use Google search, "jeopardize" users' privacy and security, and "hamstring" how the company develops AI, Mulholland wrote. Justice Department lawyer David Dahlquist said in his opening statement on Monday that the court must prevent Google from using its search monopoly to dominate the AI market. "This court's remedy should be forward looking and not ignore what's on the horizon," Dahlquist said, the Times reported. "Google is using the same strategy that they did for search and now applying it" to its Gemini AI chatbot. Google's lawyer argued that Gemini rival, OpenAI's ChatGPT, is doing just fine. Read the original article on Business Insider
Business Insider
22-04-2025
- Business
- Business Insider
Google's multibillion-dollar search engine deal with Apple at high risk in monopoly case
A federal judge will almost certainly target Google's multibillion dollar search engine deals with Apple and other companies as part of a way to remedy the tech empire's illegal online search monopoly, antitrust experts said. On Monday, Google and the Department of Justice began an expected three-week-long court battle in Washington, DC, that could result in a massive shake up of the $1.8 trillion tech behemoth. US District Judge Amit Mehta will ultimately determine Google's fate following the so-called remedies phase of the landmark case. Mehta ruled in August that Google violated US antitrust law in maintaining a monopoly with its online search business. If the DOJ gets its way, Google could be forced to sell off its key Chrome web browser, end its exclusive deals with Apple, Mozilla, Samsung and others to make Google the default search engine on web browsers and smartphones, and share search data with rivals. The DOJ also wants the court to force Google to break off its Android mobile operating system if the search market doesn't experience an increase in competition through its sweeping proposed fixes. Experts in antitrust law told Business Insider that Mehta will most likely rule for Google to end its multibillion dollar deals with companies, including Apple, to be the default search engine on their devices and browsers. Chrome sell off would be 'worst case scenario' "The judge is almost certainly going to order Google to stop paying for exclusive default status," said Rebecca Haw Allensworth, a law professor at Tennessee's Vanderbilt University. "But I don't think we know what exclusive default status means yet." Allensworth called it a "toss up" on whether the judge will force Google to divest Chrome. Requiring Google to sell off Chrome would be the "worst case scenario" for the company, said Allensworth. "Divestiture remedies are seen as pretty strong medicine," Allensworth said, adding that a break up remedy "isn't very closely related to the behavior at issue in this case." No matter what, Allensworth said she believes there will be what's called a behavioral remedy for Google, which would mean the judge will require Google to change how it arranges its contracts with distributors like Apple. "I think we just don't know exactly how that's going to be designed," she said. Additionally, Allensworth said it would be very unlikely that the judge would order Google to divest both Chrome and Android. Back in 2023, when the antitrust case went to trial, it was revealed in court that in 2021 Google paid companies more than $26 billion for the search placement deals. In 2022, Google paid Apple a whopping $20 billion to secure itself as the default search engine on the company's Safari browser, the DOJ said. At trial, the judge made a "big deal" about the fact that Google had paid Apple billions, "saying why would they do so if it didn't lock users in," said George Hay, a professor at Cornell Law School and former chief economist for the Justice Department's antitrust division. "He clearly believed that the payment had that effect," Hay said, adding that eliminating the agreement "is the most straightforward way to try to set things right." The DOJ, he said, will likely argue that's not enough, though. Nicholas Reese, an adjunct professor at New York University, said that Google's exclusivity deals with Apple and other companies "have been close to the smoking gun for DOJ and other critics because they allegedly show naked attempts to control the market and neutralize competition." Reese noted the DOJ "went big" in the remedies that it is seeking for Google, but said that getting them all would probably "surprise" the government. "I would stop short of saying we will see every remedy sought by DOJ ordered, but I do believe it will be significant," he said. Hay told BI that by asking the judge for as much as it did, the DOJ is "inviting Google to confirm that something less draconian will work." "Google of course says it wants almost no remedy," he said. The judge is expected to issue his remedies ruling by the end of the summer. Google has vowed to appeal Mehta's ruling in which he declared the tech giant a monopolist. It could be years before there's a final outcome. Syracuse University law professor Shubha Ghosh told BI that the more drastic a remedy that gets imposed, "the more likely it'll get reversed on appeal." Google's lawyer called DOJ's proposal a 'wish list' for rivals In an opening statement on Monday, Google lawyer John Schmidtlein called the DOJ's proposal of remedies "a wish list for competitors looking to get the benefits of Google's extraordinary innovations and trade secrets that we've spent decades developing," The New York Times reported. Google's vice president for regulatory affairs Lee-Anne Mulholland said the government's proposal was "unnecessary and harmful" in a blog post ahead of the start of the hearing. The DOJ's proposal would make it more difficult for people to use Google search, "jeopardize" users' privacy and security, and "hamstring" how the company develops AI, Mulholland wrote. Justice Department lawyer David Dahlquist said in his opening statement on Monday that the court must prevent Google from using its search monopoly to dominate the AI market. "This court's remedy should be forward looking and not ignore what's on the horizon," Dahlquist said, the Times reported. "Google is using the same strategy that they did for search and now applying it" to its Gemini AI chatbot. Google's lawyer argued that Gemini rival, OpenAI's ChatGPT, is doing just fine.
Yahoo
16-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
What smart people are saying about Meta's argument that it's not a social media monopoly
The FTC took Meta to trial, arguing it's a monopoly and should sell off Instagram and WhatsApp. Meta says the true "market" where it operates is bigger and more competitive than what the FTC says. Antitrust law experts say the FTC has a tough battle but a real shot at winning. The Federal Trade Commission's blockbuster trial against Meta kicked off in court this week, with CEO Mark Zuckerberg taking the stand as the first witness. Government lawyers are trying to persuade a federal judge to force Meta to sell off Instagram and WhatsApp. They argue that, along with Facebook, the acquisitions of those apps were part of an illegal scheme that allows Meta to illegally dominate the "personal social networking services" market and help the company act as an illegal monopoly. In court, Meta argues that the true market where it operates is much bigger than what the FTC claims. Far from being an illegal monopoly, Meta fiercely competes with TikTok and YouTube, Zuckerberg says, and its apps have evolved along with user habits. Besides, it says, its products are free. Here's what some of the smartest people in antitrust law are saying: The judge in the case has built a steep hill for the FTC to climb if it wants to win, Kovacic, who served as an FTC commissioner in the George W. Bush administration, said. In a previous ruling, US District Judge James Boasberg was skeptical about the FTC's argument that TikTok, YouTube, or X shouldn't be considered part of the same market as Meta's products, according to Kovacic. The trial decision would come down to the evidence from Meta's internal records, Kovacic said. "He said that the FTC, in some ways, was pushing existing law to its limits, and that he'd be looking very closely at what Meta had to say about the dimensions of the market, its position in that market, and about its justifications for the acquisitions," said Kovacic, who now teaches antitrust law at George Washington University's law school and has advised over a dozen countries on consumer protection law. "So I read in that earlier opinion some skepticism about the FTC's case." The case is basically "a toss-up," said Rebecca Allensworth, a Vanderbilt University law school professor who teaches an antitrust law class focused on Big Tech. She believes the case "is going to be won or lost" on the definition of the market where Meta competes. But it's clear, she says, that Meta meets the definition of a "monopoly power." "The monopoly power question really ought to be answered according to whether or not Meta's customers feel locked in, and whether they really feel like they can give up Facebook or if they will just put up with the equivalent of higher prices — addicting products on Facebook, lots of ads, all the sort of bad things," Allensworth said. "And I think we have plenty of evidence of that. We would call that direct evidence of monopoly power." Allensworth believes that the judge may balk at the FTC's proposed remedy of forcing Meta to divest from WhatsApp and Instagram, and might give the company a pass. "Because that's such an obvious remedy, it might implicate the merits case that comes before," Allensworth said. "Because if a judge is not prepared to do that, a judge might not want to find liability." "Meta will end up settling the case," says Peter Cohan, a strategy and entrepreneurship professor at Georgetown University's McDonough's School of Business and Babson College. He believes the FTC's argument — that Meta's acquisitions stifled competition by eliminating potential rivals — is more convincing than Meta's defense. While the company claims it faces stiff competition and doesn't charge users, Cohan says its dominant hold on digital advertising is the real issue. Despite pointing to TikTok, YouTube, and Snapchat as major challengers, Meta's market power in ad spending paints a different picture. By some estimates, Cohan says, Meta is projected to have a significant market share in social media, with Facebook and Instagram combined accounting for 36.3% and 27.5% of ad spend respectively. YouTube is also a major player, with 15.5% of ad spend. TikTok, while growing rapidly, has a smaller share, at 9.5%, If the FTC wins, Meta will likely appeal, Cohan says, but he doesn't rule out a negotiated outcome. "It might settle by spinning off Instagram," he says. A loss could also have ripple effects across the tech industry: "Google could also be more likely to lose and reach a divestiture settlement." The Biden-era FTC chair, who shepherded the lawsuit after the agency sued Meta in the waning days of the first Trump administration, told CNN that the FTC can prove the company is a monopoly because it makes its products worse. "Facebook has been significantly increasing the number of ads that it pushes to users, even though that makes the service worse," Khan said. "And that has not led it to suffer consequences in the marketplace — which itself is a marker of its monopoly power." The Susman Godfrey partner, who's represented Yale University, Alaska Airlines, and Neiman Marcus, thinks the FTC could win if it persuades the judge that the "personal social networking" market still exists today, not just when Meta bought Instagram and WhatsApp more than a decade ago. "Meta seems to concede it still has a monopoly position in personal social networking," Barnett wrote in an email. "Therefore, if Judge Boasberg accepts the FTC's definition of the relevant market — despite the rise of TikTok, YouTube, and iMessage — the FTC will win the crucial point. Only the question of remedy will remain." "I like the FTC's chances," he continued. "The bells and whistles of TikTok, etc., strike me as critical for a minority of social media mavens but at best optional for most." "This case makes a lot of presumptions about how the businesses of Instagram and WhatsApp would have evolved," said Jennifer Huddleston, a senior fellow in technology policy at the Cato Institute. She said that predicting how social media would have developed without Meta's acquisitions is inherently difficult and that both deals were approved by regulators at the time. Huddleston also questioned the government's narrow definition of the market. In her view, Meta faces real competition. "Gen Z is choosing different platforms and video forward options," she said, adding that apps like Signal and traditional SMS also compete with WhatsApp in the messaging space. If Meta loses, Huddleston said users could feel the impact. A breakup could limit the ability to cross-post content between apps, while smaller companies might struggle to maintain services or invest in safety tools. It could also "send a chilling effect on mergers and acquisitions in the tech industry more generally," with consequences for both companies and consumers, she said. The founding partner of Shinder Cantor Lerner, who's litigated numerous antitrust cases, thinks the passage of time has made the FTC's case more difficult to win. "The FTC is off to a strong start, with excellent evidence revealing Meta's concerns about maintaining its market position with nascent competition from Instagram and WhatsApp," she said. "An ultimate win, however, will be challenging given the decade that has passed since those acquisitions. In my view, with a trial expected to last into July, it is really too close to call in these early days of testimony." "Building a new app is hard," the Meta founder and CEO said on the witness stand. Zuckerberg, explaining why his company purchased Instagram, said that Meta had developed numerous homegrown apps over the years that had died on the vine. It was easier, he said, to simply purchase Instagram. "I'm sure we could have built an app," he added. "Whether it succeeded or not is a matter of speculation." Read the original article on Business Insider Sign in to access your portfolio
