Meta’s ad-verse ruling

Do you ever see an ad on Facebook or Instagram and think, “I just searched for this, why is it following me everywhere?” 

Well, you might want to flash back to that time you tapped “Accept” without reading the terms and conditions. A Nigerian court says Meta cannot make that kind of behavioural tracking a condition for using its platforms. But the Big Tech company is appealing.

What happened? On September 25, a Lagos High Court ruled that Meta unlawfully processed Nigerians' data on its Facebook and Instagram platforms, using it for behavioural advertising without valid consent. It ordered the company to stop the processing, comply with Nigeria’s data protection laws, and pay the applicants $100,000 in damages. Five days later, Meta filed an appeal. 

Explain like I'm new here: Usually, patterns emerge from a user's activity on social media, including what they click, watch, search for, or engage with. Meta said its platforms are free and funded by advertising, and that users agree to its terms and privacy policy when they sign up. The court disagreed with the notion that advertising-related profiling is automatically necessary just because ads pay for the service. 

Meta has been here before: This is not Meta’s first Nigerian privacy headache. In 2024, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) imposed a $220 million penalty on Meta and WhatsApp after a 38-month investigation into their data practices, consumer protection, and competition issues. This latest case is different, but it raises the question of how much control Nigerians have over what Big Tech companies do with their data.

What does this mean for you? For now, nothing on your Instagram feed is suddenly changing. Meta has appealed, so the September ruling is not yet a verdict. However, if the judgment survives, Meta could have to rethink how it gets that consent and how it handles Nigerian users’ data when it is processed outside the country. That could become interesting as Nigeria pushes harder on data sovereignty and keeping more locally generated data within the country.

MTN's bid to take full control of IHS Towers has cleared another regulatory hurdle, but the deal is still subject to conditions. South Africa’s Competition Commission has recommended that the Competition Tribunal approve the acquisition, provided MTN, Africa's largest telecom company, plays by a few rules designed to protect competition, customers, and jobs.

State of play: The conditions include requirements for fair, non-discriminatory access to IHS infrastructure; protections against preferential treatment for MTN; safeguards for customer information; and measures to support historically disadvantaged ownership and small businesses. In other words, MTN can acquire the tower company, but it cannot suddenly start treating the towers like a members-only club.

Between the lines: The recommendation comes as MTN moves to acquire the remaining shares in IHS for about $2.2 billion, taking its ownership of one of Africa’s biggest tower companies to 100%. IHS has nearly 29,000 towers across Africa, many used by multiple mobile operators, making the deal more than just a change in tower owners.

Nigeria is particularly important. In August, MTN also received conditional approval from the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC), including a requirement to eventually sell down up to 30% of its IHS Nigeria stake to local investors. 

The Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) has also granted an Approval-in-Principle, with conditions including no exclusivity for MTN Nigeria, protection of existing contracts and a measurable investment plan.

Zoom out: While MTN is getting closer to owning IHS outright, regulators are ensuring the telco does not get to own the towers and write all the rules, too.

If Netflix and WhatsApp had been expecting a meeting with South Africa’s telecom regulator, they can cancel it. The regulator has dropped its planned investigation into how streaming and over-the-top (OTT) platforms such as Netflix and WhatsApp affect local telecom and broadcasting companies.

What happened? On September 30, the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) withdrew its notice to investigate OTT services. 

Explain like I’m new here: Before that withdrawal, ICASA put out a notice to investigate how OTT service providers benefit from the infrastructure telecom companies built in the country. 

The regulator, with the approval of the Association of Comms and Technology (ACT), the telecom industry group, highlighted sound reasons why OTT platforms must contribute significantly to the local economy: without broadband penetration, people can't access the Internet. And without the Internet, Netflix and its OTT cohort of friends cannot reliably target South African users. In a way, telecom and broadcasting companies built the technology that those online services rely on.

OTT services provide video content over the Internet, bypassing traditional cable or satellite, including YouTube and most online entertainment platforms users love.

But was this even a logical argument? Biases aside, the telecom industry group has its reasons for pushing the “fair contribution” proposal, requiring OTT players to financially contribute to the maintenance and upgrade of bandwidth-heavy systems. The regulator, understandably, also had an obligation to listen and conduct its due diligence. Now that it has withdrawn its investigation, two things could be in play: foreign OTT platforms could get mandated in some way to contribute to the local economy, beyond the taxes they pay, or face some of the regulatory obligations that apply to local telecoms and broadcasters (and this may be an overreach).

Zoom out: For now, it's a wait-and-see. Ultimately, this could decide consumers’ fate. Restricting access to foreign OTT platforms if they fail to comply with a potential requirement could cut off consumers from services they enjoy. On the other hand, the regulator seems keen to take a balanced approach. 

SunCulture, a Kenyan agritech startup, raised $10 million in debt funding from Mirova Gigaton Fund. (Sep 27)

Here are the other deals for the week:

• Rhea, a Kenyan agritech startup, secured $100,000 in a convertible note financing round led by Obudu Capital. (Sep 28)
• Tomato Jos, a Nigerian agritech startup, raised $2 million in debt funding from Sabou Capital. (Sep 28)
• Wuchi Wami, a Zambian agritech startup, secured an undisclosed amount of funding from Inside Capital Partners. (Sep 28)
• Lersha, an Ethiopian agritech startup, secured a $100,000 grand prize from Heifer International. (Sep 29)
• Ororo Waste, a Nigerian cleantech startup, raised $1 million in funding from Rising Tide Africa. (Sep 30)
• Farm to Feed, a Kenyan agritech startup, raised $171,000 in funding from Proparco. (Sep 30)
• Prado Power, a Nigerian cleantech startup, secured an undisclosed amount in debt funding from REPP 2. (Oct 1)

That's all for this week. Before you go, Nigeria’s cross-border payments landscape is changing fast as new payment rails emerge. Here's what's happening.

Follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn for more funding announcements.

The World Wide Web3

Source:

Coin Name	Current Value	Day	Month
Bitcoin	$84,870	+ 1.73%	+ 9.42%
Ether	$2,707	+ 1.00%	+ 11.99%
XRP	$1.49	+ 0.56%	+ 10.92%
Solana	$118.67	+ 0.59%	+ 18.69%

* Data as of 06.38 AM WAT, October 2, 2026.

Written by: Yemi Kareem, Frank Eleanya, and Sucess Sotonwa

Edited by: Emmanuel Nwosu & Ganiu Oloruntade