5 ms·

As I understand it, the problem here has little to do with Google. The problem is that the transition to telehealth means that therapists are now competing dire

As I understand it, the problem here has little to do with Google. The problem is that the transition to telehealth means that therapists are now competing directly with large national mental healthare providers like BetterHealth and Talkspace mentioned in the article. Those big companies have deeper advertising pockets. If you want to break up companies to make it easier for independent therapists, those are the ones to break up. Google is just the marketplace. This is like blaming the sidewalk or the interstate highway system when Wal-Mart causes your local mom and pop store to shut down. Google isn't driving her prices up, competition is.

shuntress 6y ago
It is a little bit like that. It would probably be considered a problem if Wal-Mart paid the state/highway department to ensure that major town roads "flow naturally" to Wal-Mart and are better maintained than roads that lead elsewhere. This is definitely similar to major companies in a specific domain buying the top search result from google for any query within that domain.
- jacobush 6y ago
  Being America, I’d be stunned if Walmart didn’t grease the road bureaucracy in their favour.
- root_axis 6y ago
  Doesn't seem like a good analogy in either case. The highways are a shared public resource, the 1st page of google is just an ideal place to show an ad.
  - shuntress 6y ago
    Google is the closest thing to a "shared public resource" for indexing/searching the Internet that we have. I agree with you that there are inherent properties of physical transit pathways that make them difficult to compare "one to one" with digital index searches. But I do not think these differences make the two completely incomparable. I completely disagree that the 1st page of google is "just" an ideal place to show an ad. While it definitely is an ideal place to show an ad it is also much more than that. That is like saying a supermarket that can give cash-back at the register is just an ATM.
    - root_axis 6y ago
      > Google is the closest thing to a "shared public resource" for indexing/searching the Internet that we have. Being the closest doesn't mean it's actually close. The 1st page of google is not a "shared public resource" and not just in the physical sense. The roads are collectively owned by society and are designated and maintained for the explicit prerogatives of the public good. The first page of google is a privately owned webpage that many businesses rely on for increased sales, but it isn't even close to the only resource for society to search/index the web. > it is also much more than that Like what? > That is like saying a supermarket that can give cash-back at the register is just an ATM. This analogy doesn't fit. Cash-back is a negligible ancillary function of a supermarket while serving up ads is the sole business purpose of google.com.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      Analogies might be useful to illustrate an idea, but they are useless as evidence or for supporting reasoning. I find that they weaken arguments, and sticking to the relevant facts keeps discussions on track.
- wanderer2323 6y ago
  you analogy seems questionable to me. The major telehealth bying google ads is Wal-Mart bying 10 large highway billboards. The indie therapist not being able to afford the auction is the mom-and-pop shop not being able to afford those buidboards. now if the major telehealth would get a dedicated bandwidth and the indie therapist's video calls were getting throttled we would be talking roads etc. For now it's the 'walmart moving into a small town' scenario but the bloomberg article blames the company that operates the billboards.
  - shuntress 6y ago
    No, your analogy is inaccurate. A billboard ad is not an explicit and direct "physical" connection to the product the way that a search result is. Dedicated bandwidth and throttling, to extend my original analogy, would be like the roads going only to Wal-Mart or being difficult in some significant way to take anywhere other than Wal-Mart. It is the same problem only more pronounced. The first search result you encounter when executing some search is much more similar to the first store you encounter when searching for some store (by taking the easiest or "most natural" path into the shopping district) than it is to viewing a billboard. Edit -- To clarify what I mean about billboard ads: A billboard ad is something you see that is unrelated to whatever else you are doing. Yes, a digital "billboard" ad is still a direct connection to the product being advertised but it is also distinctly separate from whatever content or activity it displays alongside. A search result is the content/activity you have sought out by searching. There could definitely be a grey area if google's design made sponsored search results stand out more or be distinct in some way that causes them to read as some content other than a search result (either by position, border, size, color, etc) but that is very clearly not the case of their current design. Sponsored search results look exactly the same as non-sponsored search results apart from the "Ad" text displayed with the URL. They are clearly intended to look and function the same as the "normal" content of the page and not intended to be an incidental "secondary" experience alongside your search.
Dirlewanger 6y ago
The fact that you liken Google to the interstate highway system with 0 irony just shows how far we've fallen from not giving a shit that Google is a natural monopoly in this case.
- MichaelApproved 6y ago
  Monopolies aren't necessarily a problem. It's when a company abuses their monopoly that it becomes a problem. And in this case, I don't see how Google specifically is the problem.
  - specialist 6y ago
    The general idea is to "oxygenate" the market by increasing competition.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- munificent 6y ago
  I share your concerns about monopolies and monopolistic practices, including Google's (which is my employer). In this specific instance, I don't see that Google's dominance of search is a cause of the problem. Imagine that there were ten search engines all owning 10% of the market. The independent therapist was buying ads on all of them. Then COVID hits and she starts facing ad competition from national telehealth providers on all ten of those ad networks, driving up ad prices. She will have essentially the same experience, and the exact same article could be written. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how Google's larger marketshare is a large piece of what's going on here. To me, it looks almost entirely like a small business all of a sudden facing much larger competition because of telehealth. Imagine if one day every restaurant got a free teleportation terminal at their front door. If you run a local barbecue restaurant in your small town, it's going to be a lot harder to stay competitive when everyone nearby can freely choose between you, Franklin in Austin, Joe's in Kansas City, or even just the comparatively larger marketing budget of Smokey Bones. Like it or not, these independent therapists got dumped into a much larger pond.
drivebycomment 6y ago
Generally I agree with your overall points but I have one small reservation about this part: > If you want to break up companies to make it easier for independent therapists, those are the ones to break up. It's not clear breaking up BetterHelp and Talkspace will do good at this point. Fundamentally, it's not efficient or possible for all of therapists in the entire US to compete for everyone's eyeballs independently. It's impossible for consumers to meaningfully compare and "shop" against tens of thousands of therapists, nor tens of thousands of suppliers to compete for tens of millions of consumers. You need some mechanism to funnel this down and organize this market. This is why retailers and various dealers and brokers exist, and BetterHelp and Talkspace are the retailers of therapist service, just like Amazon and Walmart are the retailer for many different goods suppliers.
jariel 6y ago
Capitalism doesn't blend perfectly well with issues of Health, so we usually need to step in with some rational rules. There are special regulations for almost all aspects of Healthcare; so it's not unreasonable that there might be special rules or regulations for ads on Google as well.
titzer 6y ago
> Google is just the marketplace. That's the problem. It's a marketplace masquerading as a library.

shuntress 6y ago

It is a little bit like that. It would probably be considered a problem if Wal-Mart paid the state/highway department to ensure that major town roads "flow naturally" to Wal-Mart and are better maintained than roads that lead elsewhere. This is definitely similar to major companies in a specific domain buying the top search result from google for any query within that domain.

jacobush 6y ago
Being America, I’d be stunned if Walmart didn’t grease the road bureaucracy in their favour.
root_axis 6y ago
Doesn't seem like a good analogy in either case. The highways are a shared public resource, the 1st page of google is just an ideal place to show an ad.
- shuntress 6y ago
  Google is the closest thing to a "shared public resource" for indexing/searching the Internet that we have. I agree with you that there are inherent properties of physical transit pathways that make them difficult to compare "one to one" with digital index searches. But I do not think these differences make the two completely incomparable. I completely disagree that the 1st page of google is "just" an ideal place to show an ad. While it definitely is an ideal place to show an ad it is also much more than that. That is like saying a supermarket that can give cash-back at the register is just an ATM.
  - root_axis 6y ago
    > Google is the closest thing to a "shared public resource" for indexing/searching the Internet that we have. Being the closest doesn't mean it's actually close. The 1st page of google is not a "shared public resource" and not just in the physical sense. The roads are collectively owned by society and are designated and maintained for the explicit prerogatives of the public good. The first page of google is a privately owned webpage that many businesses rely on for increased sales, but it isn't even close to the only resource for society to search/index the web. > it is also much more than that Like what? > That is like saying a supermarket that can give cash-back at the register is just an ATM. This analogy doesn't fit. Cash-back is a negligible ancillary function of a supermarket while serving up ads is the sole business purpose of google.com.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    Analogies might be useful to illustrate an idea, but they are useless as evidence or for supporting reasoning. I find that they weaken arguments, and sticking to the relevant facts keeps discussions on track.
wanderer2323 6y ago
you analogy seems questionable to me. The major telehealth bying google ads is Wal-Mart bying 10 large highway billboards. The indie therapist not being able to afford the auction is the mom-and-pop shop not being able to afford those buidboards. now if the major telehealth would get a dedicated bandwidth and the indie therapist's video calls were getting throttled we would be talking roads etc. For now it's the 'walmart moving into a small town' scenario but the bloomberg article blames the company that operates the billboards.
- shuntress 6y ago
  No, your analogy is inaccurate. A billboard ad is not an explicit and direct "physical" connection to the product the way that a search result is. Dedicated bandwidth and throttling, to extend my original analogy, would be like the roads going only to Wal-Mart or being difficult in some significant way to take anywhere other than Wal-Mart. It is the same problem only more pronounced. The first search result you encounter when executing some search is much more similar to the first store you encounter when searching for some store (by taking the easiest or "most natural" path into the shopping district) than it is to viewing a billboard. Edit -- To clarify what I mean about billboard ads: A billboard ad is something you see that is unrelated to whatever else you are doing. Yes, a digital "billboard" ad is still a direct connection to the product being advertised but it is also distinctly separate from whatever content or activity it displays alongside. A search result is the content/activity you have sought out by searching. There could definitely be a grey area if google's design made sponsored search results stand out more or be distinct in some way that causes them to read as some content other than a search result (either by position, border, size, color, etc) but that is very clearly not the case of their current design. Sponsored search results look exactly the same as non-sponsored search results apart from the "Ad" text displayed with the URL. They are clearly intended to look and function the same as the "normal" content of the page and not intended to be an incidental "secondary" experience alongside your search.

Dirlewanger 6y ago

The fact that you liken Google to the interstate highway system with 0 irony just shows how far we've fallen from not giving a shit that Google is a natural monopoly in this case.

MichaelApproved 6y ago
Monopolies aren't necessarily a problem. It's when a company abuses their monopoly that it becomes a problem. And in this case, I don't see how Google specifically is the problem.
- specialist 6y ago
  The general idea is to "oxygenate" the market by increasing competition.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
munificent 6y ago
I share your concerns about monopolies and monopolistic practices, including Google's (which is my employer). In this specific instance, I don't see that Google's dominance of search is a cause of the problem. Imagine that there were ten search engines all owning 10% of the market. The independent therapist was buying ads on all of them. Then COVID hits and she starts facing ad competition from national telehealth providers on all ten of those ad networks, driving up ad prices. She will have essentially the same experience, and the exact same article could be written. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how Google's larger marketshare is a large piece of what's going on here. To me, it looks almost entirely like a small business all of a sudden facing much larger competition because of telehealth. Imagine if one day every restaurant got a free teleportation terminal at their front door. If you run a local barbecue restaurant in your small town, it's going to be a lot harder to stay competitive when everyone nearby can freely choose between you, Franklin in Austin, Joe's in Kansas City, or even just the comparatively larger marketing budget of Smokey Bones. Like it or not, these independent therapists got dumped into a much larger pond.

drivebycomment 6y ago

Generally I agree with your overall points but I have one small reservation about this part: > If you want to break up companies to make it easier for independent therapists, those are the ones to break up. It's not clear breaking up BetterHelp and Talkspace will do good at this point. Fundamentally, it's not efficient or possible for all of therapists in the entire US to compete for everyone's eyeballs independently. It's impossible for consumers to meaningfully compare and "shop" against tens of thousands of therapists, nor tens of thousands of suppliers to compete for tens of millions of consumers. You need some mechanism to funnel this down and organize this market. This is why retailers and various dealers and brokers exist, and BetterHelp and Talkspace are the retailers of therapist service, just like Amazon and Walmart are the retailer for many different goods suppliers.

jariel 6y ago

Capitalism doesn't blend perfectly well with issues of Health, so we usually need to step in with some rational rules. There are special regulations for almost all aspects of Healthcare; so it's not unreasonable that there might be special rules or regulations for ads on Google as well.

titzer 6y ago

> Google is just the marketplace. That's the problem. It's a marketplace masquerading as a library.