Senate Judiciary Members Concerned by Google Ad Dominance

The platform “harmed competition. It’s contributed to a lot of newspapers going out of business,” Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., told us. “Significant remedies seem to be in order.” Congress needs to examine how Google is handling “preferencing and prioritization and how they block new entrants into the marketplace,” Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., told us. The hearing was meant to determine whether and how Google is harming competition, subcommittee Chairman Mike Lee, R-Utah, told us.

During the hearing, ranking member Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., Blumenthal and Ted Cruz, R-Texas, mentioned that Google buys and sells ads and controls the market, which can’t be said for any other company. Lee and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., hammered President-Global Partnerships and Corporate Development Don Harrison for the company’s alleged anti-conservative bias, which Lee said ties into the antitrust questions. Lee cited Google threatening to ban The Federalist from its ad network. It’s not an antitrust violation, but it’s evidence of market power because the company is acting like The Federalist has no viable alternative, he said.

The Federalist had comment boards with racist commentary, which violates Google’s ad policies, Harrison said. He noted publishers have options for monetizing content. YouTube has comment sections with occasional commentary that violates platform policies and is removed using artificial intelligence and human review, he said. The Federalist is free to use Google services but must moderate its comment section, he added.

It’s ironic and somewhat hypocritical that Google might ban a group for user-generated content, Lee argued, yet it insists Communications Decency Act Section 230 is essential to shield it from liability for content from its users. “How is that not a double standard?” These policies are applied to Google’s own websites, Harrison said.

It’s extraordinary The Federalist is faced with a choice to cut off a revenue stream or moderate based on Google’s standards, Hawley said. He asked Google to publicize its content moderation standards. Harrison said he’s happy to provide ad policies showing that ads won’t appear next to harmful content.

Klobuchar cited a study from the U.K. Competition Markets Authority showing Google has dominant market share positions in every market in the ad tech ecosystem, with at least 80% in the publisher ad server and advertiser ad circuit markets. Acquisitions allowed Google to establish the monopoly power it has, she said. Klobuchar asked for an explanation that Google wasn’t simply buying competitors. CMA found competitors like Amazon, Twitter and Snap can compete, Harrison said: “There’s tremendous choice.”

Blumenthal hoped for U.S. antitrust action against Google. The company tags publishers’ readers and siphons ad dollars from them, when the money should be going to the newsrooms, he said. Google is using user data for its own benefit not for the benefit of the publisher or readers, he argued.

Newspapers keep more than 95% of the revenue from the content they sell, Harrison said: Online ad prices have fallen, and publishers are making more ad dollars. He noted that in 2018, Google paid more than $14 billion to publisher partners, up from $10 billion in 2015. They can sell the content directly, and they can use assistance from Google at a market rate, Harrison said. He denied claims the platform has total dominance over the ad market as buyer, seller and auctioneer: Facebook, Amazon and others are competitors for ad dollars.

“We’re not having this hearing because Google” is big or successful, Klobuchar said. It's because successful companies are subject to U.S. antitrust laws, she added: It should be a priority to make sure the laws are as sophisticated as the companies. Lee said he’s open to a frank discussion about antitrust laws, which shouldn’t be altered or used to address “all social ills,” including various disparities.