Connect with us

Politics

Google proposes altering contracts to correct illegal search monopoly

Published

on

Google proposes altering contracts to correct illegal search monopoly

After the government pushed for the breakup of Google, accusing it of business practices that violate antitrust laws, the Mountain View, Calif., tech giant proposed its own solutions on Friday — to restructure its business contracts instead.

“Regulating a fast-changing industry like search with an invasive decree like the one proposed by Plaintiffs would harm competition, innovation, and consumers,” Google said in a court filingFriday.

The request comes after a federal judge in August found that the tech company had illegally maintained a monopoly in search. Google said it disagreed with the decision and plans to appeal.

Amit P. Mehta, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, is now trying to decide on ways to restore competition. Last month, the U.S. Department of Justice and several states proposed solutions to fix what it described as Google’s illegal search monopoly that included forcing the company to sell Chrome.

Google’s proposed fixes are more narrow than what the DOJ suggested. What the judge decides could reshape the future of the internet and affect Google’s ad business.

Advertisement

In a court filing, Google proposed putting limits around its contracts with mobile device manufacturers and wireless carriers. For example, Google proposed that it wouldn’t enter an agreement with Apple in which it’s the default search engine unless its partners were allowed to set a different default search annually in the United States and promote other search services.

“We don’t propose these changes lightly. They would come at a cost to our partners by regulating how they must go about picking the best search engine for their customers,” said Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs in a blog post.

The nearly 300-page landmark ruling by Mehta partly focuses on how Google held onto its dominance by paying major companies such as Apple and Samsung so it’s the default search engine on web browsers and mobile devices. These agreements hindered Google’s rivals from growing and reduced the incentive for other companies to invest in search, the judge found.

“The truth is, no new entrant could hope to compete with Google for the default on Firefox or any other browser,” the judge wrote. “Google’s query and quality advantage and high revenue share payments are strong incentives simply to stay put.”

Google’s default placements on Mozilla’s Firefox made up 80% of Mozilla’s operating revenue, the decision says. But Google also pays Apple more money than all its other partners combined. In 2022, Google paid Apple an estimated $20 billion so it could be the default search engine on the Safari browser.

Advertisement

This week, Mozilla raised concerns that some of the DOJ’s proposed solutions could harm web browsers. One of the potential fixes include preventing Google from entering revenue share agreements tied to the distribution of its search services.

“By jeopardizing the revenue streams of critical browser competitors, these remedies risk unintentionally strengthening the positions of a handful of powerful players,” Mozilla wrote in a blog post. Mozilla said that Google was the default search engine in Firefox in the United States because it “provides the best search experience for our users.”

Outside of partnerships with major tech companies, there are other ways Google maintains control over the way people access search engines. Google also runs popular web browser Chrome and a mobile operating system Android.

Last month, the DOJ and several states urged the judge to force Google to sell Chrome. The agency also suggested requiring the tech company to display a “choice screen” on every Google browser when a user hasn’t chosen a default search engine so people know there are other options available.

Other ideas the government floated include allowing publishers to opt out of having Google use their content to train artificial intelligence tools and giving advertisers more control over ads that show up in search results.

Advertisement

Google pushed back against the government’s proposed solutions, calling the approach an “unprecedented government overreach.”

Mehta is expected to decide on solutions by August 2025.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Video: Congress Approves Spending Package After Political Drama

Published

on

Video: Congress Approves Spending Package After Political Drama

new video loaded: Congress Approves Spending Package After Political Drama

transcript

transcript

Congress Approves Spending Package After Political Drama

President Biden signed the spending bill early on Saturday, ensuring that there would be no lapse in government funding.

“On this vote, the yeas are 85, the nays are 11. The bill is passed.” “After a chaotic few days in the House, it’s good news that the bipartisan approach in the end prevailed … This is a good bill, and I’m glad we’re passing it.” “In January, we will make a sea change in Washington. President Trump will return to D.C. and to the White House, and we will have Republican control of the Senate and the House. Things are going to be very different around here.” Things are going to be very different around here.”

Advertisement

Recent episodes in Politics

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump announces newest nominations to lead DOJ, regulate US railroads

Published

on

Trump announces newest nominations to lead DOJ, regulate US railroads

President-elect Trump dropped his latest round of nominations Saturday afternoon, including two picks to help lead the Department of Justice (DOJ) and one to work within the Department of Transportation (DOT).

In a Truth Social post, the president-elect announced he was nominating Aaron Reitz to lead the DOJ’s Office of Legal Policy. Trump wrote that Reitz would “develop and implement DOJ’s battle plans to advance my Law and Order Agenda, and restore integrity to our Justice System.

“Aaron is currently Senator Ted Cruz’s Chief of Staff, and was previously Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s Deputy, where he led dozens of successful lawsuits against the lawless and crooked Biden Administration,” Trump continued, adding Reitz would work closely with Trump’s pick for U.S. attorney general, Pam Bondi.
 
“Aaron is a true MAGA attorney, a warrior for our Constitution, and will do an outstanding job at DOJ. Congratulations Aaron!”

TIDE TURNS FOR HEGSETH AS TRUMP’S DEFENSE SECRETARY NOMINEE GOES ON OFFENSE

Trump nominated Aaron Reitz to serve as the next head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy. (The Federalist Society)

Advertisement

Trump followed up his first announcement by naming Chad Mizelle as the next chief of staff at the DOJ, who is also slated to work with Bondi. 

“During my First Term, Chad was General Counsel and Chief of Staff at the Department of Homeland Security, where he helped to secure our Border, and stop the flow of illegal drugs and aliens into our Country,” the Republican leader explained. 

“Chad is a MAGA warrior, who will help bring accountability, integrity, and Justice back to the DOJ.”

GET TO KNOW DONALD TRUMP’S CABINET: WHO HAS THE PRESIDENT-ELECT PICKED SO FAR?

Chad Mizelle

Trump nominated Chad Mizelle to serve as chief of staff at the Justice Department. (The Federalist Society)

In a third post, Trump named David Fink as the next administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), describing his nominee as a “fifth generation Railroader.”

Advertisement

“David will bring his 45+ years of transportation leadership and success, which will deliver the FRA into a new era of safety and technological innovation,” Trump said. “Under David’s guidance, the Federal Railroad Administration will be GREAT again. Congratulations to David!”

Later on Saturday, Trump announced that he was nominating Tilman J. Fertitta, the owner of the Houston Rockets, to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Italy.

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Donald Trump with raised fist

President-elect Trump gestures after speaking during an America First Policy Institute gala at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., Nov. 14. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

“Tilman is an accomplished businessman, who has founded and built one of our Country’s premier entertainment and real estate companies, employing approximately 50,000 Americans,” Trump’s post described. “Tilman has a long history of giving back to the community through numerous philanthropic initiatives, which include children’s charities, Law Enforcement, and the medical community.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

'Know Your Enemy' podcast gets why Taylor Swift drives conservatives crazy

Published

on

'Know Your Enemy' podcast gets why Taylor Swift drives conservatives crazy

If Democrats want to understand why president-elect Donald Trump is returning to the White House, a good place to start might be the “Know Your Enemy” podcast, hosted by two self-described leftist bros who, without mockery or tongue-in-cheek elitism, explore the complicated past and feverish present of the American conservative movement.

It’s a sort of anti-Joe Rogan program for a perplexed and dismayed left-wing set curious about William F. Buckley Jr., Ronald Reagan, the rise of the tea party movement, conservative fans of the Grateful Dead and why so many right-wing commentators suffer from “Taylor Swift derangement syndrome.” The show’s interrogation of conservative history is rigorous and occasionally peppered with expletives, but the exchanges with guests are nuanced and civil.

“Know Your Enemy” was started in 2019 by Matthew Sitman, the son of a factory worker raised in a Christian fundamentalist home in central Pennsylvania, and Sam Adler-Bell, a Jew who grew up in a left-leaning family, listening to union leaders and visiting picket lines with his labor-lawyer father. They met when Sitman, then an editor at Commonweal Magazine, asked Adler-Bell to write book reviews. The two shared a fascination for country music and right-wing politics, believing the best way to oppose conservatives is not to berate or ridicule but to respect and understand.

The podcast’s topics include William F. Buckley Jr., a founder of the modern conservative movement, seen conceding defeat in the 1965 New York City mayoral election.

(John J. Lent / Associated Press)

Advertisement

“Even if I come to find the [conservative] ideas unpersuasive, there might be some kernel or core there” — such as understanding the costs and consequences of social change — “that’s worth treating seriously and exploring,” said Sitman, 43, a onetime conservative disciple turned Bernie Sanders fan.

“The left has to think really hard about why we’re right [in our beliefs],” Adler-Bell, 34, said in one episode, adding that conservatives are not “self-consciously evil,” but rather rooted in their convictions.

Such equanimity is rare in the age of podcasts and politics of recrimination. The driving forces of the moment are fixated less on enlightenment than on attacking, distorting and vanquishing. Disdain and division reverberate across a vast and partisan social media landscape that includes X, TikTok and YouTube. A recent poll by the Pew Research Center found that 37% of Americans under 30 regularly get news from social media influencers, the large majority of whom have no background with or ties to news organizations.

“Know Your Enemy,” which the two record in their New York apartments, has a modest audience — about 30,000 listeners an episode and 8,000 subscribers who bring in $39,000 a month. The show is smaller than more prominent podcasts with similarly progressive temperaments. “Pod Save America,” hosted by Jon Favreau and other former aides to President Obama, has a reported 20 million monthly downloads; and Tim Miller, host of “The Bulwark Podcast,” which is described as providing an “unabashed defense of liberal democracy,” has nearly 400,000 followers on X. Sitman has 31,300 followers on the platform, and Adler-Bell has 46,300.

Advertisement

But “Know Your Enemy” appeals to socialists, Democrats and more than a few conservatives — some who have been guests — interested in right-wing thought including that of neoconservatives, so-called reformicons and a species known as the paleoconservative. The show, as it wades into what Adler-Bell calls a “swampy morass” of conservative history that touches on free markets and American interventionism, is heavy on reading lists.

“It’s an innovative and important podcast,” said Curt Mills, executive director of the American Conservative magazine, who appeared on the show in November to discuss foreign policy and Trump’s picks for his national security team. “It doesn’t have an enormous audience, but it’s an extremely important audience.”

He added that the show’s willingness to dissect center-right ideas at a time when the left often demonizes Republicans implies “a level of curiosity that I think was often lacking for the last eight years. … They’re essentially honest brokers.”

Jon Lovett, Tommy Vietor and Jon Favreau stand in front of a yellow neon image of George Washington on a wall of newspapers

Jon Lovett, Tommy Vietor and Jon Favreau, from left, co-host the more popular “Pod Save America” with their fellow former Obama administration aide Dan Pfeiffer, not pictured.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

Other podcasts that focus on right-wing politics include “5-4,” which analyzes Supreme Court cases, and “In Bed with the Right,” which studies conservative ideas on sexuality and gender. But few are as comprehensive as “Know Your Enemy.”

The show’s liberal followers are loyal but don’t hesitate to take Sitman and Adler-Bell to task when they sense a whiff of politesse toward the right.

An interview with rising young conservative Nate Hochman, who was later fired as a speechwriter for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for posting Nazi-adopted imagery online, drew backlash. And after the Mills episode, a listener wrote: “Completely ridiculous how you let him get away with talking about [Pete] Hegseth and the intelligence scandals around Tulsi [Gabbard]. If that’s your approach to having conservatives on – no thanks.”

Another wrote, “Stop giving Trump apologists a platform.”

“We’re really not debaters,” Adler-Bell said. “I think other podcasts on the left, if they had a conservative or a person they disagreed with, the goal would be victory. To embarrass or humiliate the guests. We just don’t do that.”

Advertisement

Listening to Sitman and Adler-Bell is like wandering the basement stacks of a library with two grad students jazzed on coffee and shuffling index cards. Nothing is too obscure, no tidbit too arcane. In an episode that discussed Buckley, founder of the National Review and widely considered the godfather of modern conservatism, the hosts examined extremist and racist elements in the conservative movement half a century ago that persist today.

In another show, they discussed global right-wing populism and a class realignment that foreshadowed Trump’s victory in November.

“Know Your enemy” also delves into right-wing influences on film, music and literature. It examined how conservatism played into the careers of celebrated authors such as Joan Didion — “why she loved Barry Goldwater and hated Ronald Reagan” — and Tom Wolfe, he of the vanilla suits and quicksilver prose, who navigated how post-World War II prosperity led to American subcultures.

Sitman and Adler-Bell spent more than an hour in March on an episode about Taylor Swift.

“Why does she make the right so crazy? Why does she sometimes make the left so crazy? What does her celebrity mean?” Adler-Bell asked at the beginning of the show. “What can she tell us about the nature of American culture today? It turns out, listeners, Taylor Swift is a great lens into making sense of some of the American berserk.”

Advertisement

The podcast offers possible solutions for how liberals and Democrats can appeal to working-class voters they have lost. In an episode called “Organizing in Rural America,” the hosts spoke with Luke Mayville of Reclaim Idaho, a grassroots group that mobilized voters to expand Medicaid in a deep-red state.

“Know Your Enemy” has criticized Democrats for hubris and elitism as the party has shifted toward identity politics and urban college-educated voters. That occurred in the years Trump was breaking taboos within the Republican Party by opposing the war in Afghanistan and global trade, and, according to Sitman, tapping into a “vicious and nativist” anti-immigration sentiment that was embraced by his working-class base even as it left the GOP establishment initially uneasy.

“I can’t really remember when a candidate had shown up in the place where I grew up and told people they were being ripped off and they were right to be angry,” said Sitman, who is on the editorial board of the leftist magazine Dissent, which partners with his podcast. “The nature of Trump’s transgressions mattered less than their anger at the system.”

Taylor Swift standing against a dark background with an acoustic guitar, using a microphone

Sitman and Adler-Bell discussed Taylor Swift, and some conservatives’ views of her, for more than an hour in a March episode.

(John Shearer / Getty Images for TAS Rights Management)

Advertisement

Sitman knows something about that anger. Growing up in a blue-collar, deeply Christian home, he was shaped by the Bible and the conservative politics of self-reliance. Those who fail in life, he once thought, bring it on themselves. He carried those views into young adulthood as he met prominent conservative thinkers while interning at the Heritage Foundation and attending graduate school at Georgetown University.

“I was at my most conservative,” he said, “when I experienced the least of the world — when I was at my most naive.”

His sentiments shifted after he experienced severe depression and reflected on the struggles of others and how the economic class one is born into affects the trajectory of their future.

“The reason I moved from right to left is not because my fundamental values changed,” said Sitman, who has converted to Roman Catholicism. Rather, it was because he came to realize he wasn’t empathetic enough to class differences and the privations of others.

Sitman — who as a boy saw his father pull out one of his teeth over the kitchen sink because he lacked dental insurance — wrote in a 2016 essay for Dissent: “The failure of conservatives to attend to the world as it actually exists, the world in its suffering and hardship, drove me from their ranks.”

Advertisement

Adler-Bell’s upbringing was more secular, tailored by labor struggles and watching movies like “Matewan,” about union organizing in the coalfields of West Virginia in the 1920s. This background taught him, he said, the power of solidarity: “We are all vulnerable, frail and broken and flawed, and the only way we can overcome atomized suffering is through recognizing [this] in others.”

At which point, Sitman, the more understated of the two, chimed in during an interview: “Your diaper was pink, if not red.”

They laughed, then pressed on.

The conservative right, said Adler-Bell, who writes for Jewish Currents, the New Republic and other publications, is less empathetic to shared vulnerability.

“Trump represents,” he added, “more explicitly than any politician I think maybe in American history, … the message of the racketeer, of the mafioso who says, ‘I will protect you, and you can get yours, and everyone else, f— ’em.’ The world is a war of all against all.”

Advertisement

Both hosts wonder who will rise as key players in the new Trump administration. Elon Musk, who spent more than $250 million to help get Trump elected, is in the ascent and supports the president-elect’s pro-business agenda. But Trump’s eldest son, Donald Jr., is also a force. He is close to Vice President-elect JD Vance, whose brand of economic populism leans more toward the working class of Trump’s base than corporate America.

They are also watching how Trump, who has threatened to arrest his political enemies, will oversee the FBI and the Justice Department, and how much of a hawk Sen. Marco Rubio might be if he becomes secretary of State.

“We’re very much in Versailles, French monarch territory,” said Sitman. “Observing the courtiers around the king and trying to decipher who wins favor.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending