4 ms·

Is this a rhetorical question or does it seek an answer? Assuming the later, academics and people working on these investigations, if the "open web" is the mar

Is this a rhetorical question or does it seek an answer? Assuming the later, academics and people working on these investigations, if the "open web" is the market they are using for their antitrust analysis. If Facebook participated in this market then one could argue that there is some competition. From a footnote in the PDF: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3391913 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3391913

scarface74 6y ago
Again that goes back to slicing a market to fit a narrative and not reality.
- pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
  All antitrust lawsuits contain a narrative. There will be at least two narratives, one of which will be Google's. As for "reality" you would need to be more specific what you mean. What if someone said, "Who cares if they are slicing a market to fit a narrative?" Are you saying the authors who are "slicing the market to fit a narrative" are not allowed to do that? Or are you just saying you do not like that they are doing that? Or both?
nl 6y ago
They are wrong if they think Google is a monopoly on "open web" advertising anyway. Facebook's Audience Network allows you to buy ads on 3rd party (open) websites[1] as does VerizonMedia/Oath [1] https://www.facebook.com/business/marketing/audience-network https://www.facebook.com/business/marketing/audience-network
- pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
  What about AdGear, Adition, Polar and YoSpace?
  - nl 6y ago
    Yes and many others. However the reach of the ones I listed is huge.
    - pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
      Why didn't Google mention the ones you cited and the "many others" in its response to the CMA report? Do none of them have customers in the UK?
      - nl 6y ago
        That's a different report. I'm not particularly familiar with it, but I believe they were looking at Google dominance in search and search advertising, whereas this attempts to make an antitrust argument in "open web adverting". The argument that Google is dominant in search is much stronger than the argument made here.
        pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
        If you are not familiar with the CMA report then how do you know it does not address display ads on third party websites, i.e., "open web adverting"? In the CMA report "open web advertising" is referred to as the "open display market". https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5dfa0580ed915d0933009761/Interim_report.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5dfa0580ed915... "We have organised our work into three thigh-level themes: Theme 1 considers to what extent Google and Facebook have market power in search and social media respectively and the sources of this market power; Theme 2 assesses whether consumers have adequate control over the use of their data by online platforms, by exploring the choices they are given, how easy it is to exercise those choices and whether there is adequate protection for those who do not engage; and Theme 3 focusses on the business to business digital advertising markets, exploring a range of concerns including a lack of transparency, conflicts of interest and the leveraging of market power to undermine competition." Not disagreeing with your premise, however the Google response to the CMA report devotes a significant amount of verbiage to explaining and defending their position in the "open display market". On page 4 of the 25-page response to the CMA report you will find the heading "Competition in Digital Advertising". Under this you will see the subheadings "Search Advertising", "Display Advertising on Third Party Websites" and "Our Relationship with Publishers". The "Search Advertising" section is just over 3 pages. The "Display Advertising on Third Party Websites" is 4.5 pages. The "Our relationship with Publishers" section is just over 2 pages. It is true the CMA did not make precisely the same arguments as the authors of the "roadmap" paper. They are two different jusrisdictions. However the CMA report forms the factual basis for all the arguments in the roadmap paper.

scarface74 6y ago

Again that goes back to slicing a market to fit a narrative and not reality.

pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
All antitrust lawsuits contain a narrative. There will be at least two narratives, one of which will be Google's. As for "reality" you would need to be more specific what you mean. What if someone said, "Who cares if they are slicing a market to fit a narrative?" Are you saying the authors who are "slicing the market to fit a narrative" are not allowed to do that? Or are you just saying you do not like that they are doing that? Or both?

nl 6y ago

They are wrong if they think Google is a monopoly on "open web" advertising anyway. Facebook's Audience Network allows you to buy ads on 3rd party (open) websites[1] as does VerizonMedia/Oath [1] https://www.facebook.com/business/marketing/audience-network https://www.facebook.com/business/marketing/audience-network

pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
What about AdGear, Adition, Polar and YoSpace?
- nl 6y ago
  Yes and many others. However the reach of the ones I listed is huge.
  - pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
    Why didn't Google mention the ones you cited and the "many others" in its response to the CMA report? Do none of them have customers in the UK?
    - nl 6y ago
      That's a different report. I'm not particularly familiar with it, but I believe they were looking at Google dominance in search and search advertising, whereas this attempts to make an antitrust argument in "open web adverting". The argument that Google is dominant in search is much stronger than the argument made here.
      - pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
        If you are not familiar with the CMA report then how do you know it does not address display ads on third party websites, i.e., "open web adverting"? In the CMA report "open web advertising" is referred to as the "open display market". https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5dfa0580ed915d0933009761/Interim_report.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5dfa0580ed915... "We have organised our work into three thigh-level themes: Theme 1 considers to what extent Google and Facebook have market power in search and social media respectively and the sources of this market power; Theme 2 assesses whether consumers have adequate control over the use of their data by online platforms, by exploring the choices they are given, how easy it is to exercise those choices and whether there is adequate protection for those who do not engage; and Theme 3 focusses on the business to business digital advertising markets, exploring a range of concerns including a lack of transparency, conflicts of interest and the leveraging of market power to undermine competition." Not disagreeing with your premise, however the Google response to the CMA report devotes a significant amount of verbiage to explaining and defending their position in the "open display market". On page 4 of the 25-page response to the CMA report you will find the heading "Competition in Digital Advertising". Under this you will see the subheadings "Search Advertising", "Display Advertising on Third Party Websites" and "Our Relationship with Publishers". The "Search Advertising" section is just over 3 pages. The "Display Advertising on Third Party Websites" is 4.5 pages. The "Our relationship with Publishers" section is just over 2 pages. It is true the CMA did not make precisely the same arguments as the authors of the "roadmap" paper. They are two different jusrisdictions. However the CMA report forms the factual basis for all the arguments in the roadmap paper.