OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Tech Giants Invest Billions in AI Infrastructure

7 sources · updated 2026-10-27
Left 71% Center 0% Right 29%
5 left · 0 center · 2 right

What happened

On Monday, Meta Platforms, parent of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, said it plans to raise up to $95 billion through stock offerings to fund artificial-intelligence infrastructure. The company launched about $35 billion in equity offerings — roughly $22.5 billion of Class A common stock and $12.5 billion in depositary shares representing preferred stock — and said it plans a further $60 billion at-the-market offering of a new non-voting Class C share class once those shares begin trading in the first quarter of 2027. Nvidia, Advanced Micro Devices, and Broadcom each expressed non-binding interest in buying up to $5 billion of the common stock. Meta said last week it would create the Class C shares in part so founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg could raise liquidity to pay California's proposed wealth tax without selling existing shares and reducing his voting control; it now expects $135 billion to $145 billion in capital expenditures this year after reporting third-quarter revenue of about $65 billion, up 26 percent, while operating income fell 37 percent to $13 billion as costs rose. Meta's stock fell as much as about 1.6 percent in Monday morning trading before recovering most of those losses.
Sourcing check · Mostly on the record · 7 articles

3 of 6 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 3 of 6
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Meta, Nvidia, AMD, Jensen Huang, Mark Zuckerberg and Lisa Su
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 3 of 6
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: company filing, company announcement, company statement, regulatory filing
Credits another outlet 0 of 6
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
Unnamed sources 0 of 6
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 26, 11:51 UTC by Business Insider, naming its source. First document in the first report, from Business Insider (company filing).
Not counted 1
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Right-leaning coverage omits that Meta's operating profit has already fallen under AI costs, so readers see a record-revenue company choosing to spend rather than one whose earnings are already being eaten. Business Insider reports that operating income shrank by 37 percent last quarter as costs surged. The New York Post cites record third-quarter revenue and "investor anxiety" over how Meta will fund its build-out, but not the earnings decline behind that worry. Left-leaning coverage leads with the structure of the sale and with chipmakers' possible purchases. Right-leaning coverage leads with the scale of the bet and with fear that Meta has already spent too much. How much of the company will current shareholders still own if the full offering sells?
Bottom line

A New York Post reader hears that Meta is selling stock after a record quarter; that account never includes the 37 percent operating-income drop Business Insider placed on the same announcement.

The receipts — 4 facts one side's coverage lacks
  • Operating income shrank by 37% last quarter as costs surged from about $31 billion to $52 billion numberin Business Insider · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • Nvidia, AMD, and Broadcom indications of interest in buying up to $5 billion of common stock are not binding official statementin Business Insider · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • Meta generated $97 billion of operating cash flow in the first nine months of the year numberin Business Insider · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • The $12.5 billion slice is depositary shares representing mandatory convertible preferred stock official statementin New York Post · absent from left-leaning coverage
The Left View
Left-leaning outlets present the raise as Meta joining other hyperscalers in a capital race to lock in AI compute, quoting the company that AI is creating "significant opportunities" across its apps and new products and that it is investing "to bring personal superintelligence to billions of people and businesses." CNBC cites Goldman Sachs's estimate that AI-related capital spending could total about $7.6 trillion from 2026 through 2031 and CCS Insight partner Ben Wood's remark that the offering "reflects the eye-watering levels of investment required to keep up in the AI arms race," placing the move alongside Alphabet's earlier stock sale, SpaceX's GPU debt financing, and Anthropic's IPO filing. A CNBC Investing Club analysis argues Meta's "wildly profitable core advertising business" gives its Superintelligence Labs a "structural advantage" versus pure-play labs, and that if weaker "neocloud" providers fail, demand will not disappear and remaining hyperscalers will gain share. The same coverage acknowledges near-term "funding uncertainty" and a more discerning Wall Street, but concludes that "the revolution is real" and that durable, diversified names are positioned to come out standing.
The Right View
The New York Post frames the plan as a "staggering" buildout "fueled by offerings of new stock" undertaken "despite investor anxiety over the eye-watering sums the social-media company has already plowed into AI," and describes tech giants as "betting the farm on AI." It cites a Wall Street Journal projection that data-center and related AI infrastructure investment could total $10.3 trillion from 2025 to 2032, and notes that even after record quarterly revenue, investors have been anxious about how Zuckerberg will fund his "pricey AI push" around the Muse agent and Superintelligence Labs. The Post highlights that "the intertwined finances of a handful of AI giants — including those that have expressed interest in Meta's planned stock offering — has at times rattled Wall Street," warning that "an AI pullback could have an outsized impact on companies that are propping up each other's investments in the technology."
Our Take (balanced)
Left-leaning coverage's strongest argument is that a still-profitable advertising giant is raising equity to stay in a compute race whose scale Wall Street itself is modeling in the trillions, and that Meta's cash-generating core business is a "structural advantage" over pure-play labs if weaker infrastructure players fail. Right-leaning coverage's strongest argument is that investors are already anxious about "eye-watering" AI outlays, that operating profits have already compressed as spending surged, and that "intertwined finances" among the same chip and platform companies — including suppliers indicating they may buy the stock — mean "an AI pullback could have an outsized impact on companies that are propping up each other's investments." The central unresolved tension is whether this offering finances a durable expansion that Meta's existing business can carry, or extends a circular spending cycle whose returns are still unproven.

7 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.