Tech

How Washington insiders figured out the Trump administration was investigating Google over antitrust issues

sundar
Google CEO Sundar Pichai Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Read in app

Washington DC insiders began to realise that the US Department of Justice would follow the European Union by opening its own antitrust investigation into Google's market dominance when they tried to talk to their contacts at the Federal Trade Commission — which also looks at monopoly complaints — and were told by staff there to go to the DOJ instead.

A source familiar with both agencies' activities told Business Insider that he recently began hearing rumors that the Trump Administration was moving closer to a formal probe of Google's parent company.

The rumors were based on the notion that, after the two agencies decide who will move into action, they refer sources to the lead agency. So he requested a meeting at the FTC to find out what was going on. Sure enough, he was told to approach the DOJ instead.

Our source — who has a very good track record of obtaining insider gossip from antitrust regulators in DC — said that he believes a formal investigation is now inevitable. "If we're having a conversation that means a probe is happening," is how he characterized the attitude of Trump administration staff involved. The FTC will likely handle an Amazon probe instead, our source speculates.

As far as our source knows, the investigation will be open to look at "everything" about Google. "Adtech, privacy, even the flagship search product," our source believes.

Google did not respond to a request for comment.

The FTC has been down this road before. In 2017, the FTC declined to pursue Google on antitrust issues even though its own staff found that Google was "scraping" content from others' sites and "demoting rival offerings" in favor of its own properties in search results, according to leaked documents from the FTC.

By contrast, the European Commission levied a series of massive fines on Alphabet for abusing its market dominance. It fined Google €1.5 billion ($1.69 billion) for forcing sites to use AdSense; €2.4 billion ($2.7 billion) for promoting its own shopping sites above others in search results; and €4.3 billion ($5 billion) for abusing the dominance of Android.

"The FTC prematurely closed the investigation" in 2017, but "Europe did a deeper probe," our source says. "That changed the zeitgeist around what governments are doing." 

The DOJ will likely also be guided by the work it did in the 1990s during its antitrust investigation of Microsoft. That, too, revolved around the complicated question of whether a company can be abusing its marketplace position or harming consumers if it gives its products away for free.

At that time, Microsoft's products had been challenged by smaller companies such as Netscape, WordPerfect, and Lotus. Microsoft managed to strangle those companies by bundling its own software — Explorer, Word, and Excel — into Windows products, which was the dominant consumer computing platform at the time.

Our source says he believes Google's mobile search product is in a similar position to Microsoft in the 1990s, in principle. Most searches now take place on mobile, and Google dominates mobile platforms. When it delivers search results, Google's own sites are usually displayed as the topmost results and users have to scroll down to get the "organic" results that actually reflect the top sites competing equally on the open web. That down-ranking of non-Google sites can make it difficult for new businesses to gain marketplace traction in search.

The ultimate question is whether the DOJ can "create an environment where one company is not able to kill startups in their crib," the source says.

Read next

Jim is the former editor-in-chief of Insider's news division.Previously he was the founding editor of Business Insider UK.He has also been managing editor at Adweek, an advertising columnist at CBS Interactive, and a Knight-Bagehot Fellow at Columbia Business School. His work has appeared in Slate, Salon, The Independent, MTV, The Nation and AOL.His investigative journalism changed the law in the US First Circuit Court of Appeals (U.S. v. Kravetz), the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (North Jersey Media v. Ashcroft), New Jersey (In Re El-Atriss), and New York State (Mosallem v. Berenson).The US Supreme Court cited his work on the death penalty in the concurrence to Baze v. Rees, on the issue of whether lethal injection is cruel or unusual.He won the Neal award for business journalism in 2005 for a series investigating bribes and kickbacks in the advertising business.Here's a selection of his past stories:    The alleged betrayal in these photos, texts, and emails cost Snapchat $158 million    Inside the conspiracy that forced Dov Charney out of American Apparel    The Evolution of Ev: The creator of Twitter, Blogger, and Medium has a plan to fix the mess he made of the internet    THE "KNOCK-IN SHORT": Nigel Farage and the massive bet against the pound on the night of the Brexit vote    eBay worked with the FBI to put its top affiliate marketer in prison    How Dunkin Donuts ended up hiring a psychotic credit card thief as director of communications    BEJEWELED: The definitive, illustrated history of the most underrated game ever   • The CEO of Publicis told us how he stared down a furious internal rebellion to bet the future of his $11 billion company on artificial intelligence   • FBX: The billion-dollar Facebook business that never happened   • The €150 million check-kiting scam that bankrupted Leo Burnett in Greece   • My Polaroids of the September 11 attacks led me into America's secret court system for terrorist suspects   • YouTube deleted 130 rap videos to help police fight street gangs responsible for thousands of stabbingsDisclosure: I own shares of Twitter (TWTR).