Jon Stewart made fun of Facebook for buying Instagram a long time ago, but now Instagram is worth a lot more than when it was bought. So, Facebook probably had the last laugh because they bought something that became very popular and valuable. Read from source...

1. The title of the article is misleading and clickbait, as it implies that Jon Stewart's dig was relevant or recent, when in fact it was from 2012 and Facebook bought Instagram in 2012. This creates a false sense of urgency and relevance for the reader, who might be interested in the topic but not familiar with the history of it.
2. The article uses quotation marks to indicate that Jon Stewart's words are direct quotes, but does not provide any source or evidence for where these quotes came from. This makes the article seem unreliable and uncredible, as well as potentially misquoting or taking out of context what Jon Stewart actually said.
3. The article repeatedly refers to Instagram as a "lame" app that "kinda ruins your pictures," which shows a clear bias against the platform and its users. This is not only subjective, but also ignores the fact that many people find value and enjoyment in using Instagram, and that it has evolved over time to offer more features and functions than just photo-sharing.
4. The article implies that Facebook had the "last laugh" for buying Instagram, because of its current market valuation of $1 trillion. However, this is a flawed argument, as it does not consider the many challenges and controversies that Facebook has faced over the years, such as privacy issues, antitrust investigations, user dissatisfaction, etc. It also ignores the fact that Instagram itself has faced its own set of problems, such as copyright disputes, algorithm changes, competition from other platforms, etc. Therefore, the success or failure of the acquisition cannot be measured by a single metric, such as market valuation.
5. The article ends with a promotion for Benzinga, which is irrelevant and inappropriate for the content of the article. It also tries to persuade the reader to join their website, without providing any value or reason for why they should do so. This comes across as spammy and desperate, rather than informative and engaging.

Some possible follow-ups from me are:

- What do you think of my story critics? Do you agree or disagree with any of them? Why?
- How would you respond to the author of the article or anyone who defends it? What arguments or evidence would you use?