Analysis Summary:

The article appears mostly accurate based on the provided sources, although some claims lack direct verification. There's a moderate bias towards presenting Meta's perspective, potentially downplaying the FTC's arguments. The article's claim about Meta's defense strategy is supported by other sources discussing the antitrust trial.

Detailed Analysis:

• Claim:** "The social media company called only a handful of witnesses as it sought to prove it helped Instagram and WhatsApp after acquiring them."
  • Verification Source #2: Supports the existence of the antitrust trial against Meta.
  • Verification Source #5: Mentions Meta's argument that it helped Instagram and WhatsApp after acquiring them.
• Fail to cover:* The exact number of witnesses called by Meta. This is a minor detail, and the overall claim is supported.

Supporting Evidence/Contradictions:

• Verification Source #2: "Meta's Antitrust Trial Begins as FTC Argues Company Built Social..." This supports the existence of the trial.
• Verification Source #5: "Meta has argued that it didn't acquire Instagram and WhatsApp to..." This supports the claim that Meta is arguing it helped the companies.
• Verification Source #1 and #4 discuss Google's antitrust cases, which are related but do not directly verify claims about Meta's trial.
• The number of witnesses called by Meta is not explicitly covered by the provided sources.