A columnist keeps buying Meta, arguing Zuckerberg’s AI push should still outweigh skepticism

Meta Platforms, the parent of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, is again at the center of investor debate, this time through the lens of an individual columnist who says he keeps buying the stock even as market sentiment turns cautious around big artificial-intelligence spending.

The piece, published on July 1, 2026 by Yahoo Finance partner 247wallst, frames the purchase behavior as a repeating pattern: the author says he buys after “the crowd” concludes the AI buildout has gone too far, then adds more on pullbacks. The article references Meta shares trading around $550.25 when it was written, using that level as a snapshot of the decision point.

A key claim in the commentary ties Meta’s leadership to the broader world of prediction markets. The author points to Mark Zuckerberg and references Polymarket and Kalshi, which are platforms that allow people to trade or settle bets on real-world outcomes. The author’s wording suggests a concern about how large tech players could influence or “hijack” sentiment and infrastructure around these markets, but the piece does not present documented evidence of specific actions by Meta or Zuckerberg.

Meta has not, based on what appears in the provided material, issued a statement directly addressing Polymarket, Kalshi, or prediction-market regulation. The company’s official newsroom, which covers product and business updates, was provided as a research reference, but no specific newsroom item was cited in the excerpt for this story.

What the column does contribute is a view on the stock’s narrative risk and why the author thinks that risk is mispriced. It implies that even if the market worries about how quickly AI investments translate into returns, Meta’s scale and execution capacity are enough to justify continued accumulation for a long-term investor.

That argument plays out against a broader sector backdrop. Meta is part of the technology group where AI spending is both a cost and a competitive lever, affecting ad targeting, content ranking, and infrastructure. In that setting, investor skepticism often surfaces when costs rise faster than near-term measurable outcomes, but bulls tend to counter that the payoff can be delayed and still be substantial.

Still, the limits of the piece matter. As presented here, it is market commentary and does not include primary documentation, such as a filing, earnings transcript, or a specific Meta announcement about prediction markets or any named partnership. Readers should treat the “hijack” framing as the author’s interpretation and not as a confirmed corporate plan unless corroborated by Meta disclosures or credible reporting.

Investors watching Meta next will likely focus less on the prediction-market debate itself and more on whether the company’s AI investment trajectory shows up in operating performance, including ad performance and efficiency, and whether Meta leadership addresses governance and platform integrity concerns as AI tools roll out across its products. Separate, the market will continue to watch whether regulation and competitive dynamics in prediction markets evolve in a way that changes sentiment toward large platforms and their role in information-driven markets.