Posted by Social Science Research Network
The Capitol Forum
On August 10, The New York Post reported Google notified 700 publishers that the built-in Chrome ad blocker coming out next year will block their ads. The article previews the inherent conflict of Google serving as a gatekeeper for digital ads while also competing against publishers for ad dollars. Google’s plan to include an ad blocker extension in Chrome is likely to exacerbate calls for antitrust enforcers to investigate Google’s dominance throughout the vertical stack composed of the Android operating system, Chrome browser, Google search engine and search ads business—each of which occupy the number one market position.
A close look at ad blocking reveals a surprising lack of public information about the terms of Google’s “whitelisting” agreements with ad blocking companies, agreements in which Google pays to un-block its ads. Two companies—AdBlock and AdBlock Plus—control over 90% of the desktop ad blocking market in the U.S. and Europe and have the apparent power to interfere with billions of dollars in Google ad revenue. AdBlock was purchased in 2015 by an undisclosed buyer, whose identity remains a closely guarded secret.
For their part, publishers have refused to pay ad blockers for whitelisting, and the head of the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB), Randall Rothenberg, has referred to such payments as “extortion.” Google’s chrome extension appears to be a move to take control of ad blocking and sheds light on the high stakes for Google of reducing the threat ad blockers pose to its business model.
In researching this article, we spoke to experts on the digital advertising ecosystem and ad blocking, who spoke to us on the condition of anonymity. We also asked Google for comment, and the company directed us to its public comments Building a Better Web For Everyone and Helping Publishers Bust Annoying Ads.
Featured News
Federal Judge Orders Google to Open Android App Store Amid Antitrust Pressure
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Federal Judge Greenlights FTC’s Antitrust Lawsuit Against Amazon, Tosses Some State Claims
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Supreme Court Rejects Uber and Lyft’s Appeal in California Gig Worker Suits
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Supreme Court Sidesteps 5-Hour Energy Pricing Case, Allowing Antitrust Claims to Proceed
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Tempur Sealy and Mattress Firm Argue FTC Proceedings Are Unconstitutional in New Suit
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh