Google calls out DOJ’s ‘radical’ proposed breakup plan

Google argues, in part, that a breakup would make advertising less valuable and harm publishers and merchants.

Google today pushed back on “radical and sweeping proposals” from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in its ongoing antitrust lawsuit over Google’s illegal search monopoly.

These proposals are the latest developments in a lengthy and ongoing legal battle. Some of the suggestions are raising alarms about their potential impact beyond the scope of the case.

Why we care. If DOJ’s proposed changes go ahead – it will disrupt Google’s advertising ecosystem, potentially reducing the effectiveness and accessibility of digital ads possibly coming at an even higher cost for marketers. Additionally, any changes to Google’s search distribution and AI tools could impact how advertisers reach and engage consumers, ultimately affecting their marketing strategies and ROI.

The big picture. The DOJ’s proposals follow last month’s antitrust trial, where Google’s seemingly monopolistic practices in the $200 billion digital advertising industry were challenged.

Key concerns raised by Google. Based on the DOJ’s suggested changes, Google highlighted five risks in a blog post today:

• Privacy and security: Sharing search queries and results with competitors could compromise user data.
• AI innovation: Government intervention could hinder American technological leadership in AI at a critical time.
• Chrome and Android: Splitting off these products could disrupt their open-source models and impact various industries.
• Online advertising: Changes could disadvantage small businesses and publishers in the ad market.
• Search distribution: Restrictions on how Google promotes its search engine could create friction for consumers and harm businesses.

What’s next. Google will provide a detailed response to the DOJ’s proposals as the case moves to court next year.

Bottom line. As the antitrust battle rages on, Google is framing the DOJ’s approach as overreaching and potentially harmful to multiple stakeholders in the tech ecosystem.