Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 266 posts

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#171

Post by rodgerd »

remarkEon wrote: post #138
starwind wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bork argued that antitrust law shouldn't inherently challenge bigness. He felt that the antitrust should seek to maximize consumer welfare. That's been interpreted by the courts to mean lower prices, but any economist worth their salt will say consumer choice is an aspect of consumer welfare. It doesn't matter if Little Caesars pizza is the cheapest option, if there aren't any other pizza options, consumer welfare is…

Thomas does seem at least open to having the discussion, and has mentioned social media market position in previous opinions.

The cynic in me says that Thomas is open to the discussion to the extent that it hurts companies that he percieves as his enemies, and will shut it down as soon as it covers companies that he considers on his side.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#172

Post by cldellow »

thehappypm wrote: post #75

Google 2021 revenue: $258B Meta 2021 revenue: $118B Can someone explain how Google has a monopoly when there are competitors in their league?

Meta is cited in the complaint [1]. Google and Facebook realized there was a risk they could each cannibalize the others' margins if they both had to compete in a market with many players. They made a deal to avoid that.

The relevant part is around paragraph 187, under the "Google Further Stunts Header Bidding by Working to Bring Facebook and Amazon into Its Open Bidding Fold" header.

Maybe relevant disclosure: I used to work for a company that was a launch partner of Facebook's Audience Network [2]. In a separate lawsuit in 2020, some state attorneys general claimed that Facebook's internal communications showed that FAN was just a smokescreen to get Facebook leverage to make a deal with Google. Oops, silly us.

[1]: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1563746/downl...

[2]: https://www.facebook.com/audiencenetwork/news-and-insights/h...

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#173

Post by dekhn »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #131
dekhn wrote: post #94

I'm less concerned about Google Ad market share and more concerned with their placement of Google properties above competitors on the search results page (IE, Google Reviews over Yelp, or airline prices, etc).

For the vast majority of google searches there are no relevant ads. All these searches are subsidized by someone googling "flights to new york" and booking a flight right there. Google provides an immense public good with free (and mostly ad-free) results to all kinds of questions, which other flight search engines do not. Imagine: A flight search engine as a marketing gimick starts a web search engine, and shows fli…

Dunno about you, but if I search "SFO to NYC", the entire first page (after the Google Flights "onebox") is relevant results and they're not ads- but they effectively are- they're search results that include prices. scrolling down further I see 'sponsored results' (IIUC those are ads inline with the search results).

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#174

Post by makapuf »

jefftk wrote: post #147
speeder wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, can Meta provide search engine ads for my company that use the expensive Google ones?

Reading the article and skimming the suit, it's only about ads on the general web ("display ads"), not ads on search pages.

There are ads on websites ?

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#175

Post by rodgerd »

emodendroket wrote: post #97

I'm kind of sour on antitrust as much of a solution for today's issues. If we had five smaller Googles doing the same thing what would that make better?

Forcing, say, the Google OS (Android/Chromebook) and Browser business to justify its existence independent of the ad-selling business, and YouTube to justify its video-hosting existence independent of the other two would certainly dramatically modify the landscape for all three.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#176

Post by frozenlettuce »

strongpigeon wrote: post #162
impulser_ wrote: post #158

I'm guessing the worst case is they are forced to sell off the exchange side of the Ads business, which isn't that much revenue compared to the revenue they make selling ad space. This is probably going to have a lot less effect than what people are assuming it will have. Google and Facebook have never had more competition in the Ad space. Apple and Amazon are building big Ad businesses fast. That's not the problem.…

I agree with your take. Most likely they’ll be forced to divest from the Ads Exchange business which won’t affect them materially. It would open up some possibilities for actors in that space to shift the balance of (pricing) power a bit, but I’m unsure the impact will be huge. All the big new advertising platforms tend to own their whole stack like you mentioned (Amazon, Apple) and for good reasons.

I believe that not controlling the exchange will affect them materially. Not because of the exchange's profits, but because of the data that it provides that lets Google optimize their campaigns (giving it an unfair advantage, as the competition has no access to this data).

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#177

Post by whatshisface »

rodgerd wrote: post #171
remarkEon wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thomas does seem at least open to having the discussion, and has mentioned social media market position in previous opinions.

The cynic in me says that Thomas is open to the discussion to the extent that it hurts companies that he percieves as his enemies, and will shut it down as soon as it covers companies that he considers on his side.

That would stand out among SC justices as abnormal, they're usually only biased when it can be consistent, which covers most cases but doesn't go so far as applying different law to different companies.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#178

Post by whatshisface »

xxpor wrote: post #71
xvector wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lina Khan may have written great papers but she isn't fit for the job. She harbors a hate for big tech and cannot be impartial in her dealings. See her recent attempt to prevent Meta from acquiring Within. There is no sane, level-headed case that could possibly paint this acquisition as an antitrust violation. Even most legal experts will agree that Lina Khan's case is a stretch at best. It's clear that this case is…

The FTC chairperson is a part of the Executive branch, not a judge. It's not her job to be impartial; she's allowed to have a point of view.

I don't know anything about the acquisition, but speaking generally, appointees leave less lasting precedent when they spend their time chasing individual vendettas rather than establishing consistent ruts that the system can run down once they leave.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#179

Post by ricardo81 »

strongpigeon wrote: post #160

I think it’s worth saying for people not too familiar with the space that this is specifically about Display and Video ads on third party websites. The lawsuit is about how Google managed to get in the entire stack (publisher, exchange and (less importantly for the lawsuit) buy side) and (according to the plaintiffs) abused their positions. I’d really encourage people read the lawsuit. It’s long, but most of the repo…

I CTRL+F'ed for Doubleclick, where possibly much of it started.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#180

Post by jeffbee »

scarface74 wrote: post #166
echelon wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows and Mac scare the user when switching to a non-first party browser. That, at minimum, should be highly illegal. It's wildly anti-competitive when the platform already has home field advantage. System dialogues and prompts continue opening in the platform browser, which further continues to nag the user to switch back. Again, totally unfair. These nags and scares should not be allowed. Competition is what make…

> That, at minimum, should be highly illegal. It's wildly anti-competitive when the platform already has home field advantage. So should it also be illegal for third party browsers to keep nagging the user that they should be the default? That’s what Netscape did for years and what Chrome does

In what way does it nag?

Apple will nag you to switch to Safari, even if you have literally never used Safari. It just pops up from time to time with a notification that cannot be ignored.

Post reply on HN