Amazon Has Been Surprisingly Quiet About the 2025 Nintendo Switch 2

Unusual Silence on Antitrust Concerns by Amazon In an era where Big Tech companies like Google, Apple, and Meta frequently engage in public battles with regulators, Amazon has remained notably silent on the growing antitrust pressure it faces. Major lawsuits have been filed against Amazon by regulators such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the European Union, and others. These lawsuits claim that Amazon engages in anti-competitive practices such as stifling third-party sellers, imposing predatory pricing, and unfairly promoting its own goods. However, in contrast to its rivals, Amazon has not engaged in aggressive public relations campaigns, fiery CEO statements, or media blitzes to defend itself. Why has Amazon remained silent? Legal Caution – Public statements can be used against companies in court. It’s possible that Amazon’s legal team is recommending minimal public involvement in order to avoid accidentally admitting fault or bolstering regulators’ arguments. Amazon may be attempting to prevent lawsuits from citing executives’ emails or comments against Meta and Google. Different Business Model: Amazon’s dominance in e-commerce and AWS (cloud computing) is less dependent on public perception and user trust than that of Meta (Facebook) or X (Twitter). Customers and businesses use Amazon for its price and convenience, not its public image. Behind-the-Scenes Influence – Amazon has one of the most powerful lobbying operations in tech, spending over $20 million annually on DC lobbying. Rather than fighting publicly, it may be working to shape legislation and regulatory outcomes discreetly.
Avoiding Further Scrutiny – High-profile fights with regulators (like Apple vs. More investigations frequently result from Epic or Google’s antitrust litigation. Amazon may believe silence helps the news cycle move on faster.

Confidence in Its Defenses – Amazon has consistently argued that its practices benefit consumers (lower prices, fast shipping) and that its marketplace helps small businesses. When its legal arguments are strong, it might not see the need for a public defense. Contrast with Other Tech Giants
Google has run ads, published blogs, and sent executives to argue that its search dominance is fair.

Apple loudly defended its App Store policies during the Epic Games trial.
Meta has vigorously refuted antitrust allegations, even purchasing newspaper ads to criticize the FTC. Amazon, meanwhile, has mostly responded through legal filings and quiet lobbying—perhaps betting that its market power speaks louder than PR.
The Risks of Silence

While staying quiet avoids short-term backlash, it could also mean losing the narrative. Public opinion—and even judges—may be influenced if regulators and the media portray Amazon as a monopolist without offering any counterarguments. Conclusion
Amazon’s silence is likely a strategic choice, not an oversight. Whether this approach works long-term depends on whether it can win in court—and whether consumers and policymakers start demanding more accountability.