The regulators ordered the company to change its way of displaying search results-a first-ever move that has shaken the technology world. Accusations of anti-competitive practices, at the heart of this decision, have been hurled at Google for allegedly abusively modifying its algorithms with the aim of reducing visibility for some websites and online service providers. This order comes after a negative ruling by the court, which concluded that Google’s changes in algorithm had dropped traffic to various platforms such as Booking, Expedia, and Airbnb by as high as 30%. The reality, however, is that the number of affected platforms is way longer and could run into thousands.
Demands Presented by the European Commission
The list of demands that the European Commission has given does not merely advocate going back to the pre-controversy search algorithms. It has some specific requirement:
Allow Display of Prices and Images Directly in Search Results: Companies should be able to display their prices and images directly on the search results.
Google’s Services Should Not Dominate Searches Visually: Google’s services should no longer dominate visually in every search result that contains various elements in visual form. For instance, when searching for a product name, the top results often feature a selection of offers promoted through Google’s advertising platform, highlighted in a manner that tempts users to click, thereby overshadowing the actual search results. Without a perfect match for the search query, the promoted offers are often mere approximations, wasting users’ time and diverting them from the sought-after information. This is an even more urgent issue for content sites that have watched their revenue plummet due to the reduced exposure via the most widely used search engine.
Exclusion of Maps in Certain Languages: German, Belgian, and Estonian search results should not include a map of relevant locations.
Using the DMA, the commission wants to make the tech companies revisit their business practices in the community space on pain of heavy fines and other restrictions. However, Google and the companies affected by algorithm changes have voiced their criticism over the remedies proposed by the EU.
Response of Google
Google has termed demanded changes as difficult compromises. Oliver Bethel, Google’s legal director, remarked that such requirements would have no positive effect on the companies involved. Some companies and experts share Bethel’s viewpoint, arguing that the proposed changes fail to address the main issue, which is the new search algorithm itself. Critics argue that Google’s services will still be featured prominently over other search results, and forcing the EU to conceal the map of relevant providers could hurt small businesses – such as hotels and restaurants – even more by making them more difficult to locate in the physical world.
U.S. Authorities Step In
Meanwhile, U.S. authorities have officially started ordering Google to separate different business components. First to split from Google could be the Chrome browser, followed by the Android operating system. This follows an investigation that found Google was operating a monopoly in several segments of activity.
The Future of Chrome and Android
The Department of Justice filed documents in a D.C. court to force Google to divest its Chrome browser. This can be done by either selling it to a third party or by placing it in a separate independent company that would operate the further development of Chrome without interference from Google. This would open up competition and bar Google from suggesting Chrome through its services or through the Android operating system.
At present, the U.S. government isn’t requiring it for Android, but that can change if Google does not finally alter its monopolistic practices in the mobile operating systems space. A first step might be to cease incentivizing the utilization of its search service as the default or preferred option in the Android operating system.
More from the DOJ
Stop Payments to Partners for Default Search: Google should not pay any partner to keep Google Search as the default, especially the fat money it pays to Apple.
Open Search Index to Rivals: Google should be forced to open its search index to competitors at marginal cost, with the possible effect of enabling the creation of alternative search engines based on similar technology, thus allowing actual competition.
Transparency in Search Result Ranking: Google will have to explain how it sorts out the results of a search, giving signals of classification to other companies. Such transparency will disrupt many SEO optimization services but may also negatively affect them because everyone would have access to the same information directly from Google for the best optimization of content.
Opt-Out of AI Summarization: Websites should have the right to refuse AI summarization of their information in searches without penalties regarding their performance in search results.
These main proposals will be fleshed out in a revised document due in March, which will determine whether these remedies are the only ones the US will seek. The settlement is expected to start in April 2024, under the Trump administration. Coincidentally, the initial investigation that found Google a monopoly also started under Trump’s first term.
You can check the official DOJ document on The Verge for more information.
Both Europe and the U.S. are making bold moves to reshape Google’s business practices, possibly a seminal event that will change the digital landscape. It remains to be seen whether these changes will produce more competition and fairness, but one thing is for certain: the tech giant is receiving an unprecedented level of regulatory scrutiny on both sides of the Atlantic.
+ There are no comments
Add yours