6 ms·

Dear Justice Department: Take a look at google AMP and how they use it to strong-arm publishers by linking it to search placement. You'll find some stuff.

sdan 7y ago
AMP is just the start. I won't be surprised if we find out Google is promoting websites for using Google Analytics.
- duskwuff 7y ago
  There's already some questionable aspects, like the way that Google search query strings are only available if you sign up for Google Analytics. And I would be very interested to hear what Google does with the other data they collect with Analytics...
- tantalor 7y ago
  No, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLmO1GE4GvI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLmO1GE4GvI > search quality in general does not use Google Analytics in ranking > it won't affect your ranking
  - lohszvu 7y ago
    Do you actually believe them? I don't.
    - sdan 7y ago
      I agree with lohszvu and given this was made nearly a decade ago, I'm pretty sure their tactics have changed (I don't even think AMP was made in 2010).
- SomeOldThrow 7y ago
  If Google we’re truly committed to building a search engine that is useful they would give the user control of ranking. I hope one day we see a search engine not driven by ad incentives....
  - zo1 7y ago
    They don't even have to be that "extreme" about it. Simple tools that would still allow them to "sell" ads but give the user more control. E.g. Being able to "blacklist" certain domains from results. Same thing applies to youtube. You can not permanently block/remove/disable channels from being present in the content results/feed. I think that deep-down Google high-ups "know" that giving some of these "basic" usability features would essentially disable their control of the content that they push to you. E.g. imagine publicly-shared black-lists of bad domains and bad channels that one could subscribe to. Similar to the ad blockings lists that have generated a bit of a thriving ecosystem. I.e. smart people would eventually use this basic "building block" to build content-control that would be more decentralized/democratic and really personal.
fyoving 7y ago
People don't seem to understand how this stuff works in the US, Google has full editorial control over their search results protected by the first amendment and that right was affirmed in court time and time again: https://searchengineland.com/another-court-affirms-googles-first-amendment-control-search-results-209034 https://searchengineland.com/another-court-affirms-googles-f... If you don't like their free no lock in service go elsewhere, and that's why there is no sherman act case here, which is why if the DOJ actually does anything here it would be a waste of time and resources.
- glbrew 7y ago
  I'm not a lawyer but the first amendment argument is a separate concern than antitrust violations. You can exercise your first amendment rights while still breaching antitrust law.
  - fyoving 7y ago
    Depends on what's being investigated here, if the government would actually want to compel Google to alter their search results then it's a first amendment case.
    - tantalor 7y ago
      > Take a look at google AMP The argument here is its unfair to bias ranking towards a preferred format. In this case, something about excluding competitors, except AMP is completely open-source[1] so...? The counterargument is yes you can, because it's your pamphlet/newspaper/website and you're the editor, not the government. [1] https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml
      - bduerst 7y ago
        Yeah, if AMP is antitrust then so is Facebook's Open Graph. Despite the hate for both on HN, neither format is targeting competitors or hurting consumers in this case.
justAnotherNET 7y ago
Google is a bottom bitch to the "intelligence" agencies. Their supremacy will be protected at the highest levels by all the unseen orgs in our gov.
burtonator 7y ago
It would be interesting to start an Hacker News but for 'anti-trust' suggestions. Basically you have a company and then people like us can upvote areas we think companies are breaking the law.

sdan 7y ago

AMP is just the start. I won't be surprised if we find out Google is promoting websites for using Google Analytics.

duskwuff 7y ago
There's already some questionable aspects, like the way that Google search query strings are only available if you sign up for Google Analytics. And I would be very interested to hear what Google does with the other data they collect with Analytics...
tantalor 7y ago
No, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLmO1GE4GvI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLmO1GE4GvI > search quality in general does not use Google Analytics in ranking > it won't affect your ranking
- lohszvu 7y ago
  Do you actually believe them? I don't.
  - sdan 7y ago
    I agree with lohszvu and given this was made nearly a decade ago, I'm pretty sure their tactics have changed (I don't even think AMP was made in 2010).
SomeOldThrow 7y ago
If Google we’re truly committed to building a search engine that is useful they would give the user control of ranking. I hope one day we see a search engine not driven by ad incentives....
- zo1 7y ago
  They don't even have to be that "extreme" about it. Simple tools that would still allow them to "sell" ads but give the user more control. E.g. Being able to "blacklist" certain domains from results. Same thing applies to youtube. You can not permanently block/remove/disable channels from being present in the content results/feed. I think that deep-down Google high-ups "know" that giving some of these "basic" usability features would essentially disable their control of the content that they push to you. E.g. imagine publicly-shared black-lists of bad domains and bad channels that one could subscribe to. Similar to the ad blockings lists that have generated a bit of a thriving ecosystem. I.e. smart people would eventually use this basic "building block" to build content-control that would be more decentralized/democratic and really personal.

fyoving 7y ago

People don't seem to understand how this stuff works in the US, Google has full editorial control over their search results protected by the first amendment and that right was affirmed in court time and time again: https://searchengineland.com/another-court-affirms-googles-first-amendment-control-search-results-209034 https://searchengineland.com/another-court-affirms-googles-f... If you don't like their free no lock in service go elsewhere, and that's why there is no sherman act case here, which is why if the DOJ actually does anything here it would be a waste of time and resources.

glbrew 7y ago
I'm not a lawyer but the first amendment argument is a separate concern than antitrust violations. You can exercise your first amendment rights while still breaching antitrust law.
- fyoving 7y ago
  Depends on what's being investigated here, if the government would actually want to compel Google to alter their search results then it's a first amendment case.
  - tantalor 7y ago
    > Take a look at google AMP The argument here is its unfair to bias ranking towards a preferred format. In this case, something about excluding competitors, except AMP is completely open-source[1] so...? The counterargument is yes you can, because it's your pamphlet/newspaper/website and you're the editor, not the government. [1] https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml
    - bduerst 7y ago
      Yeah, if AMP is antitrust then so is Facebook's Open Graph. Despite the hate for both on HN, neither format is targeting competitors or hurting consumers in this case.

justAnotherNET 7y ago

Google is a bottom bitch to the "intelligence" agencies. Their supremacy will be protected at the highest levels by all the unseen orgs in our gov.

burtonator 7y ago

It would be interesting to start an Hacker News but for 'anti-trust' suggestions. Basically you have a company and then people like us can upvote areas we think companies are breaking the law.