FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson has called on Tim Cook to review possible political bias in Apple News’ practices after allegations that the platform is censoring conservative news outlets.

“Recently, there have been reports that Apple News has systematically promoted news articles from left-wing news outlets and suppressed news articles from more conservative publications,” Ferguson wrote in a letter posted to X on Wednesday.

Apple declined to comment on the letter.

The focus on perceived conservative censorship has been a regular theme of the Trump administration, with the White House launching a media bias section of its website in December.

The webpage includes an ‘offender hall of shame’ that names a story weekly that the administration finds misleading.

A portal was announced the same week, “calling on everyday Americans to support the truth and hold the Fake News accountable” by submitting biased articles.

Apple can legally promote any content it wants to on its news platform, which Ferguson acknowledged.

“We do not have the authority to require Apple or any other firm to take affirmative positions on any political issue, nor to curate news offerings consistent with one ideology or another,” he wrote.

Ferguson’s letter cited a study from the Media Research Center, a conservative watchdog group, that looked at featured stories on Apple News during morning time slots in January.

According to the study, outlets considered right-leaning by AllSides media bias ratings were not featured in a 620-story sample.

President Donald Trump shared a New York Post write-up of the study on his Truth Social account early Wednesday.

Apple has so far navigated Trump’s second term fairly well, weathering the early tariff blitz and crackdown on China manufacturing, which included the president’s desire to have iPhones made in the U.S.

Cook hand-delivered a gold-and-glass trophy to Trump in the Oval Office in August as the company pledged another $100 billion to bolster U.S. manufacturing.

According to Section 5 of the FTC Act, the news aggregator could be violating terms if its suppression or promotion “is contrary to consumers’ reasonable expectations such that failure to disclose the ideological favoritism is a material omission.”

Ferguson told Cook to undergo a “comprehensive review” and take corrective action if the Apple News curation is not consistent with the company’s terms of service.

Shares of grocery delivery service Instacart dropped about 7% in extended trading on Wednesday, following a report that said the U.S. Federal Trade Commission has begun an investigation into the company’s pricing practices.

The FTC sent a civil investigative demand to Instacart, Reuters reported, citing unnamed people.

“The Federal Trade Commission has a longstanding policy of not commenting on any potential or ongoing investigations,” the FTC told CNBC in a statement. “But, like so many Americans, we are disturbed by what we have read in the press about Instacart’s alleged pricing practice.”

A study released last week showed that prices for the same products in the same supermarkets that work with Instacart can vary by around 7%, which can result in over $1,000 in extra annual costs for customers. Instacart responded by saying that retailers determine prices listed in the app.

In 2022, Instacart spent $59 million to acquire Eversight, a company specializing in artificial intelligence-driven pricing and promotions for retailers and consumer packaged goods. Instacart sought to “create compelling savings opportunities for customers in real-time” with Eversight, according to a regulatory filing.

Instacart declined to comment on the investigation but said reporting has mischaracterized its pricing system.

“Much of what’s been reported has mischaracterized how pricing works on Instacart,” a company spokesperson said in an email. “First, our retail partners control their pricing strategies, and we work with them to align their online and in-store pricing wherever possible. Second, these tests are not dynamic pricing nor surveillance pricing – prices on Instacart do not change in real time nor are they based on supply or demand, and we never use personal, demographic, or user-level behavioral data to set item prices.

“These tests are a form of randomized A/B testing, similar to the way retailers have long run pricing tests between different stores.”

Earlier on Wednesday, Robert Garcia, a U.S. House Democrat from California, sent a letter to Instacart CEO Chris Rogers asking for a report on how the company sets prices.

“It is unconscionable that corporations are adding to Americans’ financial strain with algorithmic — and potentially surveillance — pricing,” wrote Garcia, who is ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

— CNBC’s Annie Palmer contributed to this report

Read Reuters’ full report here.

Meta won its high-profile antitrust case against the Federal Trade Commission, which had accused the company of holding a monopoly in social networking.

In a memorandum opinion released Tuesday, Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., said the FTC failed to prove its argument. The case, initially filed by the FTC five years ago, centered on Meta’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.

“Whether or not Meta enjoyed monopoly power in the past, though, the agency must show that it continues to hold such power now,” Boasberg said in the filing. “The Court’s verdict today determines that the FTC has not done so. A judgment so stating shall issue this day.”

Boasberg dismissed the case in 2021, saying the agency didn’t have enough evidence to prove “Facebook holds market power.” In August of that year, the FTC filed an amended complaint with more details about the company’s user numbers and metrics relative to competitors like Snapchat, the now-defunct Google+ social network and Myspace.

After reviewing the amendments, Boasberg in 2022 ruled that the case could proceed, saying the FTC had presented more details than before.

“We are deeply disappointed in this decision,” said Joe Simonson, the FTC’s director of public affairs. “The deck was always stacked against us with Judge Boasberg, who is currently facing articles of impeachment. We are reviewing all our options.” 

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, former operating chief Sheryl Sandberg, Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom, and other current and former Meta executives all testified in the trial, which began in April.

The social media company’s shares were little changed Tuesday. The stock is up about 2% for the year, badly underperforming broader indexes and most of its megacap tech peers.

“The Court’s decision today recognizes that Meta faces fierce competition,” the company said in a statement. “Our products are beneficial for people and businesses and exemplify American innovation and economic growth. We look forward to continuing to partner with the Administration and to invest in America.” 

The ruling comes a little over two months after Google avoided the harshest possible penalty from an antitrust case it lost last year. While Google was found to hold an illegal monopoly in its core market of internet search, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta decided the company would not be forced to sell its Chrome browser, bucking the Department of Justice’s request. Google was, however, ordered to loosen its hold on search data.

In the Meta case, the FTC claimed the company shouldn’t have been allowed to buy Instagram for $1 billion in 2012 and WhatsApp for $19 billion in 2014, and the agency called for those units to be divested. The commission also alleged that there were no major alternatives for apps like Facebook and Instagram that people use to communicate with friends and family in a online, social space.

However, a major challenge for the FTC, according to the judge,…

The Federal Trade Commission is suing real estate giants Zillow and Redfin, alleging the two illegally conspired to reduce competition in the online multifamily rental listing market, the agency said Tuesday. 

In the complaint, the FTC alleges the companies violated federal antitrust laws earlier this year when Zillow paid Redfin $100 million to essentially re-host Zillow multifamily rental listings on Redfin and its sites.

Zillow- and Redfin-owned platforms such as Zillow Rentals and Rent.com are used by millions of Americans searching for their next home, the FTC said.

As part of the arrangement, the agency said Redfin agreed to terminate contracts with its existing advertising customers and assisted Zillow in acquiring that business. Redfin also committed to staying out of the multifamily advertising market for up to nine years and reduce its role to merely syndicating Zillow’s listings, making Redfin’s sites virtually identical to Zillow’s.

The FTC also alleges Redfin fired hundreds of employees shortly after the deal was signed and then helped Zillow selectively rehire many of them. 

“Paying off a competitor to stop competing against you is a violation of federal antitrust laws,” said Daniel Guarnera, director of the FTC’s bureau of competition, in a statement. “Zillow paid millions of dollars to eliminate Redfin as an independent competitor in an already concentrated advertising market—one that’s critical for renters, property managers, and the health of the overall U.S. housing market.”

Following the FTC’s announcement, shares of Zillow and Redfin parent Rocket Companies fell sharply in afternoon trading.

“Our listing syndication with Redfin benefits both renters and property managers and has expanded renters’ access to multifamily listings across multiple platforms,” a Zillow spokesperson said in a statement. “It is pro-competitive and pro-consumer by connecting property managers to more high-intent renters so they can fill their vacancies and more renters can get home. We remain confident in this partnership and the enhanced value it has delivered and will continue to deliver to consumers.”

Redfin did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

The FTC’s lawsuit seeks to unwind the agreement and may include requirements for divestitures or restructuring to restore competition in the rental advertising market.

Amazon will pay $2.5 billion to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations that the company duped users into paying for Prime memberships, the regulatory agency announced Thursday.

The surprise settlement comes as Amazon and the FTC were just three days into the trial in a Seattle federal court. Opening arguments in the case occurred Tuesday, but the settlement allows Amazon to avoid having a jury at the trial return a verdict with potentially larger damages than the settlement with the FTC.

The lawsuit, filed by the FTC in June 2023 under the Biden administration, claimed that Amazon deceived tens of millions of customers into signing up for its Prime subscription program and sabotaged their attempts to cancel it. Three senior Amazon executives were at risk of being held individually liable if the jury sided with the FTC.

Amazon will pay a $1 billion civil penalty to the FTC and will refund $1.5 billion to an estimated 35 million customers impacted by “unwanted Prime enrollment or deferred cancellation,” the agency said. Under the terms of the settlement, Amazon will give $51 to eligible customers within 90 days.

Amazon admitted no wrongdoing in agreeing to settle, the FTC said.

The agreement prohibits Amazon from misrepresenting the terms of Prime. It also requires the company to make clear and conspicuous disclosures about the terms of the program during enrollment, and says Amazon must get consumers’ express consent before charging them for a subscription. Amazon also has to provide an easy way for users to cancel their subscription, the agency said.

As part of the settlement, Amazon and two of its executives, Prime boss Jamil Ghani and Neil Lindsay, a senior vice president in the company’s health division who previously held a role in the Prime business, will be prohibited from unlawful conduct.

FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson called the penalty a “monumental win” for the agency under the Trump administration.

“The Trump-Vance FTC is committed to fighting back when companies try to cheat ordinary Americans out of their hard-earned pay,” Ferguson said in a statement.

Amazon spokesperson Mark Blafkin said in a statement that the company and its executives “have always followed the law and this settlement allows us to move forward and focus on innovating for customers.”

The penalty is one of the largest ever imposed by the FTC. The agency in 2019 hit Facebook, now known as Meta, with a $5 billion fine for violating consumers’ privacy.

Still, the $2.5 billion fine is equivalent to roughly 0.1% of Amazon’s market cap, which now sits at close to $2.4 trillion. Shares of Amazon were up slightly following the announcement.

Launched in 2005, Amazon’s Prime program has grown to become one of the most popular subscription services in the world, with more than 200 million members globally, and it has generated…