This paper is aimed at examining two articles that are related to an important event in the world of online and social media. In particular, one should speak about the acquisition made by Facebook. This corporation purchased a start-up company WhatsApp at the price of almost $ 22 billion. This decision has given rise to various responses and many journalists tried to discuss the reasons for this step and its effects. In their articles, Jared Newman and Adam Hartung enable readers to get better insight into this decision. Overall, in both cases, the authors discuss possible reasons why Facebook could have taken this step; however, the writers try to make different arguments. In particular, Adam Hartung wants to show that this choice is fully justified from a financial viewpoint, while Jared Newman intends to explore the consequences of this decision, especially its impact on Internet users. These are the main details that should be discussed in more closely. Overall, these articles have certain similarities that should be considered by the readers. In particular, both authors try to provide the reasons why the senior management of Facebook chose to acquire a start-up company that had not fully proven its financial sustainability: “Changing communication requirements have altered the use, and impact, of things like images, photos, charts and text. All of these have the potential impact of slowly (or not so slowly) eroding the value (which is noticeably lofty) of Facebook” (Hartung par. 5). This company has developed an application that can substitute traditional textual messages sent by the users of mobile phones. However, it was not clear how this business would develop. In turn, both authors argue that social medial continuously evolve, and companies that operate in this sector have be very responsive to changes; otherwise they can quickly become obsolete. Newman, for instance, puts a strong emphasis on the dangers of putting all stakes on social networking and disregarding the power of applications: “Facebook is pretty safe from becoming the next MySpace or Friendster, but it can’t risk losing peoples’ attention at the hands of newer, cooler apps” (Newman par. 12). Hartung, in his turn, reminds of the transient nature of the information transfer: “Two years ago […] WhatsApp developed a superior answer for messaging” (Hartung par. 7). So, the managers of these businesses should pay close attention to the changes in external environment. In turn, the managers of Facebook want to make sure that the company can offer the best services to users (Hartung par. 10). This task is critical for their financial performance in the future. So, one can argue that these journalists try to explain the line of reasoning that the management could follow. On the whole, this question is of great interest to various pundits because many of them feel uncertain about the true value of WhatsApp. These are the main similarities that one can single out in terms of the articles’ content and the methods of representing it to the target audience. However, there are certain differences between the two articles. In particular, Adam Hartung wants to justify this decision from a financial viewpoint, i.e., from the