Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

I don't think this article explains it well. Google sells ad space on behalf of the publishers and also sells the ads on behalf of the advertisers. It also runs the auction that places the ads into the ad space. See this graphic https://images.app.goo.gl/ADx5xrAnWNicgoFu7. Parts of this can definately be broken up without destroying Google.

And crucially, there are leaked emails, other evidence that demonstrate (at the very least historical and occasional) corruption of this dual- (multi?) agency arrangement. Among the allegations:

The Google ad exchange favored its own platforms, limiting the ability of other exchanges to compete fairly in bidding for ad inventory. https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-s...

In limiting the number of bidders, Google inflated the prices for ad inventory. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-26/closing-arguments-giv...

Google engaged in bid rigging where competitors agree on who will win a bid, again to inflate prices. https://www.justice.gov/atr/preventing-and-detecting-bid-rig...

Google entered market allocation agreements to create an unfair playing field. https://www.winston.com/en/insights-news/avoiding-antitrust-...

I'm willing to believe there's an issue with Google's ad sales, but this comment doesn't have the specifics I'm interested in - in spite of all of the citations.

> In limiting the number of bidders, Google inflated the prices for ad inventory. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-26/closing-arguments-giv...

I had a hard time finding any specifics in that article. It's about closing arguments and does not even mention the number of bidders.

The DOJ press release [1] would be a better citation.

> Google engaged in bid rigging where competitors agree on who will win a bid, again to inflate prices. https://www.justice.gov/atr/preventing-and-detecting-bid-rig...

Note that this link is just to the definition of bid rigging, not an accusation against google.

> Google entered market allocation agreements to create an unfair playing field. https://www.winston.com/en/insights-news/avoiding-antitrust-...

This is an article "Avoiding Antitrust Issues In Search Term Ad Agreements".

[1]: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/press-release/file/1563...

Thank you very much for your comment. It used to be my favorite saying was "lie with statistics". I think it needs to be updated to "lie with citations".

Frankly, I think what the parent comment is doing is flat-out lying. Or else they were doing some kind of test to see if people actually read citations.

The last two you quote are especially egregious. E.g. saying "Google engaged in bid rigging where competitors agree on who will win a bid, again to inflate prices. https://www.justice.gov/atr/preventing-and-detecting-bid-rig... gives the clear implication that the link supports the antecedent. hammock's comment is complete bullshit.