In a brazen attempt to quash competition, Facebook Inc. is stealthily incorporating emulations of Snapchat features on its platform.
But Snap isn’t taking the scandal-plagued social media giant’s thievery lying down.
Like the antagonist in J.K Rowling’s Harry Potter novels, Snap evidently views Facebook as a maleficent adversary.
Facebook’s attempt to impede Snapchat’s growth has already
been well documented, as the monopolistic social media network has thus far integrated
nearly every unique innovation its rival has ushered in.
“Facebook’s quest to mimic Snapchat is undeniable at this point,” Engadget reported in 2017. “In just the last few months, Instagram, Whatsapp and Messenger have all integrated some form of Stories — a disappearing slideshow format that Snapchat is famous for — while Facebook Live dabbled in Snapchat-esque selfie filters.”
Mark Zuckerberg’s anti-conservative, anti-Republican network also restricts users from linking their accounts to Snapchat profiles.
The Voldemort files also outline how Facebook filters the search engine of its subsidiary Instagram to prevent Snapchat-related content from appearing in its results or Instagram’s “Explore” section. Content posted using the #snapchat filters and hashtags are blocked from appearing on Instagram. Prior to officially banning Snapchat from Instagram, the tech giant allegedly issued a warning to influencers stating they’d lose their verified status upon continuing to share Snap links.
Zuckerberg reportedly gave Snap’s co-founder and CEO Evan
Spiegel an ultimatum using intimidation, according to WSJ’s sources, demanding
he sell Snapchat to Facebook or regularly endure watching his platform’s
blasting Facebook for being “anti-Trump,” and violating
antitrust law, President Donald Trump met with Zuckerberg at the White
House last week.
Facebook and Trump both insisted the meeting was productive, however bipartisan efforts to regulate Facebook’s amassing power, size, and wealth at the state and federal level are underway.
Reports of Snapchat’s alleged documentation of Facebook’s anti-competitive behavior comes as lawmakers across the nation on both sides of the aisle throttle the tech giant with antitrust probes.
Democrats and Republicans at the federal and state level have joined forces to rein in the unaccountable digital titan’s wealth, size, and market power.
The House Judiciary Committee launched a bipartisan probe on Sept.13 into whether Facebook as well as monopolistic Google, Apple, and Amazon are breaching antitrust law, mandating the digital market giants turn over internal documents and communications that deliberately eliminated its competitors during the time frame they rapidly expanded.
Virtually every state attorney general on Sept. 9 charged Facebook
and Google with antitrust violations and announced plans to investigate the
tech giants for using its conglomerate power to eliminate their competitors and
stifle users. Standing in front of the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., 50
attorneys general from U.S. states and territories signed onto an antitrust
lawsuit into the Silicon Valley tech giants. Alabama and California are the
only states that opted-out of the investigation.
In July, the FTC officially opened an antitrust investigation into the entirety of the tech sector, Facebook noted in its second quarter earnings announcement.
Facebook is also facing a major legal battle waged by
investigative journalist and congressional candidate Laura Loomer. In a court
filing seeking to dismiss the $3 billion defamation lawsuit Loomer filed
against the tech company, Facebook argued that it is a “publisher,” and
therefore can ban and censor “dangerous individuals” under the First Amendment.
In May, Facebook permanently banned Loomer and defamed her when they branded her as a “dangerous individual.” When Loomer filed her lawsuit, Facebook updated their terms of service to include a section that allowed its users to post threats against “dangerous individuals”.
However, Zuckerberg has insisted under oath in Congressional
testimony that Facebook is a “platform,” and is therefore exempt from
prosecution of illegal activity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency
Tech “platforms” are not liable for content created by its
user under the law, while “publishers” are in prosecutorial jeopardy if their
writers defame someone.
It is undeniable that Facebook defamed Loomer.
Facebook’s admission of being a publisher amid the legal
battle may nullify its Section 230 protections.