> How have consumers been harmed by the Instagram acquisition? Facebook didn't shut them down, substantially change the product, or force users to use their other products.
Consumers have been fairly directly harmed, actually. Facebook operates a walled garden, without interoperability. You can post from Facebook to Instagram, or Instagram to Facebook, but not Instagram to Snapchat.
It would be nice if social networks were more open, in the spirit of the web. But they're not, and by they're nature, network effects are everything. No one wants to be on a social network that none of their friends use.
Meanwhile, Facebook has been among the most aggressive data collectors, collecting all manner of data on users, and then selling and monetizing that data.
Beyond that, Facebook also controls an extremely large amount of speech in the world, including political speech. All of this is directly harmful to consumers.
If there were several large social networks, both of these might be mitigated, or resolved.
Consumers have been fairly directly harmed, actually. Facebook operates a walled garden, without interoperability. You can post from Facebook to Instagram, or Instagram to Facebook, but not Instagram to Snapchat.
It would be nice if social networks were more open, in the spirit of the web. But they're not, and by they're nature, network effects are everything. No one wants to be on a social network that none of their friends use.
Meanwhile, Facebook has been among the most aggressive data collectors, collecting all manner of data on users, and then selling and monetizing that data.
Beyond that, Facebook also controls an extremely large amount of speech in the world, including political speech. All of this is directly harmful to consumers.
If there were several large social networks, both of these might be mitigated, or resolved.