Capitol News

Earlier this week, a federal judge ruled that Google holds an illegal monopoly on search, violating U.S. antitrust laws. Google, the world’s most popular search engine, pays billions of dollars annually to be the exclusive search engine on Apple and Android devices.

MSU experts are available to comment on what this court decision means for the technology and advertising industries and its potential to reshape how people discover information.

Anjana Susarla, Omura-Saxena Professor of Responsible AI in the MSU Broad College of Business, studies the economics of information systems, social media analytics, and the economics of artificial intelligence. She has been featured in leading technology publications including Wired and Gizmodo, as well as national outlets such as the Associated Press and NBC News.

"Google has a dominant position in online search, which means dominance of the informational environment and digital advertising ecosystem that consumers and businesses are part of. The current decision highlights that Google’s unparalleled ability to collect data about consumers coupled with its domination of online search further accentuates the access to scale that Google enjoys, disadvantaging its competitors. Looking at the future, we need to consider whether Google’s informational advantage also translates to an advantage in the race to build better AI models. AI models need enormous amounts of training data. Google’s search monopoly also could advantage them over rivals in this regard."

David Markowitz is an associate professor of communication in the MSU College of Communication Arts and Sciences. His research uses language to understand social and psychological processes.

"This ruling has important implications for how people think about using and learning on the internet. For years, if you didn’t know the answer to something, you were told to ‘Google it.’ The days of using ‘Google’ as a verb may be over or at least others may join the lexicon very soon."

Greg Taucher, academic specialist in the MSU Department of Advertising and Public Relations, is an expert in advertising management and campaign development. He spent more than 25 years in leadership roles at global advertising agencies.

"The Google antitrust action was always going to be a ‘when’ and not an ‘if’. Google controls over 90% of the search engine market and last year had $175 billion in search-related revenue so the calculus was pretty simple. And given the market cap of its parent company Alphabet one has to believe that any fines imposed by the Department of Justice should this ruling stand would be an easy ‘get.’

Going back to the Microsoft antitrust case in 1998 tech companies are used to writing checks. The obvious low-hanging implication of Judge Amit Mehta’s ruling is that advertisers may begin to see erosion in efficiencies and economies of scale realized through their search engine optimization or SEO activities used so that they rank higher in Google search."