Look, I get it — the issues with Google, Facebook, Amazon. But I can’t help but think about how AT&T and other ISPs banded together to claim they shouldn’t be regulated because they are Internet companies just like FANG during the Net Neutrality discussions. When I see just how bad ISPs are acting, in lack of competition, price gouging, content ownership, data monitoring, it really seems they were successful in shift…
I think more importantly, ISPs made a (in my opinion, bullshit) free market argument that resonated with conservatives. At the same time, FANG made themselves an enemy of conservatives. Conservatives are now in power.
Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google
161–170 of 440 posts
Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google was also very positively connected to the Obama administration. It was some googlers that stepped in and turned around healthcare.gov for instance. I've heard a lot of rumors that they gave a lot of data access to the campaigns too.
Google engineers also built Obama's campaign software. The relationship was far tighter than most people realize.
Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Collects money, yes. But collects more data? I'm dubious.
Perhaps you forgot about AWS? More than 70% of the world's internet data goes through just one of their data centers: https://www.nextgov.com/analytics-data/2016/01/70-percent-gl...
Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google
#164Relevant tweet from a Yelp SVP, who propagated many allegations of anticompetitive behavior in Google Search: > :) https://twitter.com/lutherlowe/status/1134621790720995328
Maybe someone will investigate their mafia-like treatment of small businesses as well.
Maybe yelp had to resort to these monetizing tactics because their results were buried by google promoting their own business-ratings copy-cat service?
Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google
#165I don't see how after the FTC came up empty the DOJ would fare any better as arguable the sherman act is a much tougher route, and the competition landscape has changed to google's detriment (amazon ads, facebook, etc). Anyway the article is quite scarce and the source is the WSJ so they might be trying to amplify some stuff or even advocate for it.
The FTC backed off because the administration at the time (2012-2013) were friendly with Google.
Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you post a screenshot of this popup? Never seen it in years of Firefox use and lots of Google searching. Maybe one of my plugins blocks it.
Here's a screenshot from Edge. https://i.imgur.com/iwymopx.png Sometimes it's in a new top bar on the page but cannot remember if that's only on Gmail.
Damn, that is some duplicitous ad copy, especially in light of recent events.
Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
AMP is just the start. I won't be surprised if we find out Google is promoting websites for using Google Analytics.
No, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLmO1GE4GvI > search quality in general does not use Google Analytics in ranking > it won't affect your ranking
Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google
#168Good. To quote an old friend who worked for Google: "I'm worried that if the rest of America knew what we were actually doing here they would literally come here and kill us..."
Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google
#169Relevant tweet from a Yelp SVP, who propagated many allegations of anticompetitive behavior in Google Search: > :) https://twitter.com/lutherlowe/status/1134621790720995328
Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that this amazingly nameless "white house advisor"and title is clear spin for their narrative in the same way the "top competition counsel" thing is (and proven wrong by totally trivial fact checking), do you have evidence or anything to back up that this was not a standard meeting?
Do you think you might have a conflict of interest here?