Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"Information Asymmetries. Because Google’s ad tech products face little or no meaningful competition, Google has been able to operate its products within a black box, affording publishers and advertisers limited visibility into how, why, and even at what price, website advertising inventory is sold. One industry report suggests that approximately 15% of all digital advertising spend is simply unaccounted for, with publishers and advertisers unable to determine which intermediary may have siphoned this spend off for its own gain. Reduced transparency diminishes the ability of publishers and advertisers to make informed choices in selecting their ad tech products and hampers their ability (and rivals’ as well) to serve as a competitive constraint."

You can read the full lawsuit here: https://www.justice.gov/d9/case-documents/attachments/2023/0...



Too bad the DOJ attorney does not "grill" over that. Instead, quote the Reuters article

> Dahlquist asked Juda if they had introduced changes to ad sales in a way that raised the cost-per-click by a consumer that advertisers pay. "I believe that's fair," said Juda.

> But Wendy Waszmer, a lawyer for Google, asked Juda on Wednesday afternoon on if there were ways that his ads quality team could raise prices unilaterally. "No," Juda responded.


He said "no taxes." So that was wrong, wasn't it?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: