Course Project
Frank1239
Course Project
a day ago
65
files (1)WeekCourseProject.docx
WeekCourseProject.docx
Week 8: Course Project: Final Paper
Instructions
You are to write a five-page paper on the published article you selected in Week 5 that references a legal, ethical, or political issue about the corporation that you selected in Week 1 that has been alleged or found responsible for the issue.
State either your support or opposition to the article’s position on the corporation and its issue and if you agree with the outcome.
Identify what changes or recommendations you would present to your personal business if this matter occurred to your corporate entity, using references to the materials covered in this course.
Refer to the Course Project Overview for assignment requirements and rubric. It is important to follow the rubric to ensure maximum points and to avoid missing a criteria for grading.
This assignment should be written in APA style and should include the following.
1. Five pages in length (not including the title page and reference page)
2. Double-spaced
3. 12-point font
Week 5 Course Project: Article Selection
Article Summary
The selected article is Judge sides with Meta in antitrust trial, will not spin off WhatsApp and Instagram by John Ruwitch (2025) published by NPR. It reports on the result of the antitrust case of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against Meta Platforms, Inc.
The FTC filed a lawsuit against Meta in 2020. The agency said that Meta's acquisition of Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 was to eliminate potential rivals. The FTC referred to this as a "buy or bury" approach (Ruwitch, 2025). It had requested the court to compel the sale of both apps by Meta. In November 2025, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled in favor of Meta. He found that the FTC did not establish that Meta currently has a monopoly. He noted that the social media landscape has shifted since the case was filed. Facebook and Instagram are now direct competitors with YouTube and TikTok. According to Meta, both acquisitions were accepted by the regulators at that time. The FTC did not agree with the decision and questioned the fairness of the judge. According to a former FTC chairman, antitrust litigation might not be a suitable way to control technology firms that are moving fast (Ruwitch, 2025).
Issues to Cover
Three issues will be addressed in this project. The first is legal. The case is a test of how courts apply Section 2 of the Sherman Act to monopoly claims. It also raises questions under Section 7 of the Clayton Act on mergers that reduce competition. One important aspect is the definition of the relevant market by the Court. The second issue is ethical. When a company purchases a competitor to eliminate competition, it raises issues surrounding fair dealing and obligations to consumers. The third is a political one. The article describes Meta's efforts to improve its relationship with the Trump administration. This included a $25M settlement and a $1M first donation (Ruwitch, 2025).
Relevance to Course Materials
These issues relate to the course materials in the legal, ethical and political environment of business. The case demonstrates how courts use antitrust laws to address rapidly evolving markets and how demanding the government's burden of proving can be. It is also an expression of the course theme of balancing profit-making with social responsibility and an illustration of the politicization of the corporate strategy, as well as of the role of public pressure.
Background on Meta Platforms, Inc.
Instagram and WhatsApp are owned by Meta Platforms, Inc., formerly Facebook, and are headed by chief executive officer Mark Zuckerberg. This case is among several government anti-trust proceedings against major tech companies such as Google, Amazon and Apple (Ruwitch, 2025).
References
Ruwitch, J. (2025, November 18). Judge sides with Meta in antitrust trial, will not spin off WhatsApp and Instagram. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2025/11/18/nx-s1-5495626/meta-ftc-instagram-whatsapp-antitrust-ruling
Rubric
LMA.KCL.MGMT520.WK8.FinalPaper.JUL26
|
LMA.KCL.MGMT520.WK8.FinalPaper.JUL26 |
||
|
Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent Paper used proper published article referencing a legal, ethical or political issue on the corporation that has been alleged or found responsible for the issue. Provided background research on the issue to provide context. |
60 to >48.0 ptsExcellentThe paper concisely presents a proper published article referencing a legal, ethical or political issue on the global corporation that has been alleged or found responsible for the issue. Provided background research on the issue to provide context. 48 to >42.0 ptsCompetentThe paper presented is missing one required element. 42 to >36.0 ptsLimitedThe paper presented is missing two required element. 36 to >1.0 ptsPoorThe paper is missing several required elements. 1 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe final paper does not meet this competency. |
60 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMGMT601.D.RESEARCH Analyze information to solve business problems through comprehensive research and use of appropriate technologies. threshold: 3.0 pts |
4 ptsExcellent: The final paper demonstrates excellent analysis of information to solve business problems through comprehensive research and use of appropriate technologies. 3 ptsCompetent: The final paper demonstrates competent analysis of information to solve business problems through comprehensive research and use of appropriate technologies. 2 ptsLimited: The final paper demonstrates limited analysis of information to solve business problems through comprehensive research and use of appropriate technologies. 1 ptsPoor: The final paper demonstrates poor analysis of information to solve business problems through comprehensive research and use of appropriate technologies. 0 ptsUnacceptable: The final paper does not meet this competency. |
4 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMGMT601.A.GLOBAL ECONOMY Demonstrate in-depth knowledge of enterprise-wide functions relevant in the global economy. threshold: 3.0 pts |
4 ptsExcellent: The final paper demonstrates excellent knowledge of enterprise-wide functions relative to the global economy. 3 ptsCompetent: The final paper demonstrates competent knowledge of enterprise-wide functions relative to the global economy. 2 ptsLimited: The final paper demonstrates limited knowledge of enterprise-wide functions relative to the global economy. 1 ptsPoor: The final paper demonstrates poor knowledge of enterprise-wide functions relative to the global economy. 0 ptsUnacceptable: Does not demonstrate this competency. |
4 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSupport or Opposition State either your support or opposition to the article's position on the corporation and if you are in agreement with the outcome. |
20 to >18.0 ptsExcellentThe paper presents a clear and concise explanation of support or opposition based on the articles position of your global corporation. 18 to >12.0 ptsCompetentThe paper presents a somewhat clear and concise explanation of support or opposition based on the articles position of your global corporation. 12 to >6.0 ptsLimitedThe paper presents a limited explanation of support or opposition based on the articles position of your global corporation. 6 to >1.0 ptsPoorThe paper presents a poor explanation of explanation of support or opposition based on the articles position of your global corporation. 1 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe final paper does not meet this competency. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRecommendations Identify what changes or recommendations you would present to your personal business if this matter occurred to your corporate entity. |
20 to >18.0 ptsExcellentThe final identifies changes and recommendations. 18 to >12.0 ptsCompetentThe final paper shows some changes and recommendations. 12 to >6.0 ptsLimitedThe final paper shows limited in changes and recommendations. 6 to >1.0 ptsPoorThe final paper poorly depicts recommendations and changes. 1 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe final paper does not meet this competency. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMGMT601.E.ANALYSIS Apply analytical tools and applications to develop analyses and solutions to address the needs of global stakeholders. threshold: 3.0 pts |
4 ptsExcellent: The final paper applies excellent analytical tools and applications to develop analyses and solutions to address the needs of global stakeholders. 3 ptsCompetent: The final paper applies competent analytical tools and applications to develop analyses and solutions to address the needs of global stakeholders. 2 ptsLimited: The final paper applies limited analytical tools and applications to develop analyses and solutions to address the needs of global stakeholders. 1 ptsPoor: The final paper applies poor analytical tools and applications to develop analyses and solutions to address the needs of global stakeholders. 0 ptsUnacceptable: The final paper does not meet this competency. |
4 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAI Counterargument Paper describes a counterargument generated by AI and contains an analysis of whether or not student agrees with the counterargument. |
20 to >18.0 ptsExcellentThe final paper shows both a proficient counterargument generated by AI and an analysis of whether or not student agrees with the counterargument. 18 to >12.0 ptsCompetentThe final paper shows some counterargument generated by AI and an analysis of whether or not student agrees with the counterargument. 12 to >6.0 ptsLimitedThe final paper shows a limited counterargument generated by AI and an analysis of whether or not student agrees with the counterargument. 6 to >1.0 ptsPoorThe final paper shows a poor counterargument generated by AI and an analysis of whether or not student agrees with the counterargument. 1 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe final paper does not meet this competency. |
20 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Format, Spelling, Grammar, and References Paper adheres to APA style formatting: double spaced (12-point font, 1-inch margins), headings, title page and reference page. References: Paper includes reliable sources to support. Paper has no spelling, grammar, typographical or formatting errors; and meets 5 page minimum requirement. Writing quality is excellent - clear, organized and professional. |
10 to >8.0 ptsExcellentThe final paper demonstrates professionalism with APA format, spelling, grammar and references. 8 to >6.0 ptsCompetentThe final paper is missing one element. 6 to >4.0 ptsLimitedThe final paper is missing 2 elements. 4 to >1.0 ptsPoorThe final paper is missing several elements. 1 to >0 ptsUnacceptableThe final paper does not meet this competency. |
10 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMGMT601.B.COMMUNICATION Demonstrate professional oral and written communication skills through written reports, research projects, project plans and oral presentations. threshold: 3.0 pts |
4 ptsExcellent: The final paper demonstrates excellent professional written communication through research and proper presentation 3 ptsCompetent: The final paper demonstrates above average professional written communication through research and proper presentation. 2 ptsLimited: The final paper demonstrates limited professional written communication through research and proper presentation. 1 ptsPoor: The final paper demonstrates minimal professional written communication through research and proper presentation. 0 ptsUnacceptable: Does not demonstrate this competency. |
4 pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMGMT601.C.DIVERSITY Collaborate effectively with diverse populations in multiple settings. threshold: 3.0 pts |
4 ptsExcellent: The final paper considers diverse populations within multiple settings of the policy. 3 ptsCompetent: The final paper considers some diverse populations within multiple settings of the policy. 2 ptsLimited: The final paper considers limited diverse populations within multiple settings of the policy. 1 ptsPoor: The final paper considers minimal diverse populations within multiple settings of the policy. 0 ptsUnacceptable: The final paper does not meet this competency. |
4 pts |
Total Points: 150
