How Big Tech Is Losing Their Antitrust Trials feat. Jason Kint

Summary

Better Offline: How Big Tech Is Losing Their Antitrust Trials feat. Jason Kint

Released on April 23, 2025 by Cool Zone Media and iHeartPodcasts

---

Introduction

In the latest episode of Better Offline, tech industry veteran Ed Zitron delves into the significant developments of Big Tech's antitrust trials with special guest Jason Kint, CEO of Digital Content Next. The discussion centers around the recent Department of Justice (DOJ) victory against Google in the ad tech antitrust trial, its implications, and the broader impact on the tech landscape.

---

1. Overview of the DOJ vs. Google Antitrust Trial

Ed Zitron introduces Jason Kint, highlighting his extensive experience with the Google Ads trial and other related FTC and DOJ cases. Jason provides a foundational understanding of the case, emphasizing the DOJ's accusation that Google held monopoly power across multiple facets of the ad tech marketplace.

“This is the adtech case against Google that was in Virginia... around Google having market power and monopoly power on the buy side, the sell side, and in the exchange and then illegally using that monopoly power.”
— Jason Kint [03:04]

---

2. The Verdict Explained

Jason Kint breaks down the court's decision, which largely sided with the plaintiffs, marking a significant win for the DOJ. The judge identified Google's monopoly power in the ad exchange and ad server marketplaces and condemned the illegal tying of these products.

“The decision from the judge was that mostly in agreement with the plaintiffs and it was a big win for the Justice Department... they illegally tied those two products together.”
— Jason Kint [03:04]

He clarifies that while Google retains substantial influence on the buy side of ads, the court did not find evidence of monopoly abuse in that specific market segment.

“...they have their largest player on the buy side of ads... but not that they... had a form legal market there that they abused.”
— Jason Kint [04:16]

---

3. Proposed Remedies

Ed inquires about the DOJ's sought-after remedies. Jason outlines that the primary remedy is structural separation, compelling Google to divest certain components of its ad tech operations to eliminate monopolistic control.

“On this case, it's a structural separation of their roles in the ad tech marketplace.”
— Jason Kint [05:18]

Potential actions include spinning off the ad server marketplace and the ad exchange into separate entities, possibly distributing them to shareholders or establishing entirely new companies.

“A separate company that is the ad server marketplace. Yeah. And... and the exchange itself too.”
— Jason Kint [05:44]

---

4. Auction Manipulation: Last Look Explained

A critical aspect of the case involves Google's manipulation of ad auctions, specifically through practices like "Last Look." Jason elucidates how Google could preview bids and subsequently adjust their own bids to outpace competitors, disadvantaging publishers and advertisers alike.

“The allegations were that... Last look, Google was able to see everybody's bids... and then bid higher if they wanted.”
— Jason Kint [07:38]

This manipulation not only stifled competition but also potentially caused significant financial harm to publishers through unfair auction strategies.

---

5. Impact on Other Tech Giants

The implications of the verdict extend beyond Google, potentially affecting other major players like Meta (formerly Facebook). Ed notes the similarities between Google's practices and those under scrutiny in Meta's antitrust cases, suggesting that these rulings could herald a new era of regulatory oversight for Big Tech.

“So what happens next?... in terms of what's the schedule going forward for remedies."
— Jason Kint [13:03]

---

6. Meta’s Antitrust Trial

Jason shifts focus to Meta's ongoing antitrust trial, where the DOJ is examining whether Facebook's acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp were strategic moves to maintain its dominance in the social networking market. The court has scrutinized internal communications, revealing Meta's intent to neutralize competitors and maintain its market stronghold.

“...Mark Zuckerberg met with the Trump administration... and offered to settle for $450 million...”
— Jason Kint [39:03]

These revelations further underscore the systemic issues of monopolistic practices within Big Tech.

---

7. Implications for the Digital Advertising Ecosystem

The potential breakup of Google and Meta could fundamentally reshape the digital advertising landscape. By dismantling their extensive control, new competitors could emerge, fostering a more competitive and fair marketplace. Advertisers might benefit from more transparent and cost-effective ad purchasing options, while publishers could experience a resurgence in autonomy and revenue opportunities.

“...these cases are so inherently intertwined.”
— Jason Kint [31:32]

---

8. Optimism for a Better Internet

Despite the gravity of these trials, Jason expresses optimism about the future of the internet and digital markets. He credits the judiciary's clear understanding and effective communication of complex tech issues as pivotal in achieving these landmark decisions.

“It does make me optimistic to see courts doing what they're supposed to be doing.”
— Jason Kint [37:57]

This positive outlook is reinforced by the bipartisan support for antitrust actions, suggesting a unified front in addressing Big Tech's overreach.

---

9. Conclusion

As the episode wraps up, both Ed Zitron and Jason Kint reflect on the transformative potential of these antitrust rulings. They anticipate significant shifts in how digital advertising operates and foresee a more equitable internet landscape emerging from the dust settled by these legal battles.

“These are issues that stretch across the parties that are... pretty unique in this, in this current moment.”
— Jason Kint [38:47]

Ed encourages listeners to stay informed and engaged as these cases continue to unfold, promising further discussions on the evolving tech industry's impact on society.

---

Notable Quotes

• “The decision from the judge was that mostly in agreement with the plaintiffs and it was a big win for the Justice Department...”
  — Jason Kint [03:04]

• “On this case, it's a structural separation of their roles in the ad tech marketplace.”
  — Jason Kint [05:18]

• “...Google was able to keep charging 20% of the exc. Exchange market...”
  — Jason Kint [07:34]

• “It does make me optimistic to see courts doing what they're supposed to be doing.”
  — Jason Kint [37:57]

---

About Jason Kint

Jason Kint is the CEO of Digital Content Next and a prominent figure in tech industry discussions. With firsthand experience in major antitrust trials, he offers unique insights into the regulatory challenges facing Big Tech. Listeners can follow Jason on Twitter at @Jason_Kint or visit Digital Content Next.

---

Further Engagement

For more in-depth analysis and updates on Big Tech's regulatory battles, subscribe to Better Offline on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you get your podcasts. Join the conversation on Discord and Reddit.

---

This summary captures the essence of the discussion between Ed Zitron and Jason Kint, focusing on the pivotal moments of the antitrust trials against Big Tech giants like Google and Meta, and their far-reaching implications.

Transcript

[Michael Kasin]

The big guests continue on Las Culturistas. This week, it's the very funny Amy Poehler. Don't overthink it. They talk water. We did not drink water growing up. Water was not a thing. Parenting. You got teen boys. This is like the black diamond of parenting. And of course, I don't think so, honey. Horror movies. Okay, okay. Amy Poehler is on Las Culta. The latest episode is out now. Listen to Las culturistas on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you listen to podcasts, run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ad supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, iHeart's twice as large as the next two combined. Learn how podcasting can help your business. Call 844-844-IHeart. In a world of economic uncertainty and workplace transformation, learn to lead by example from visionary C suite executives like Shannon Schuyler of PwC and and Will Pearson of iHeartMedia. The good teacher explains the great teacher inspires.

[Jason Kint]

Don't always leave your team to do the work. That's been the most important part of how to lead by example.

[Michael Kasin]

Listen to leading by example executives making an impact on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Michael Kasin, founder and CEO of.

[Jason Kint]

Free C Ventures and your guide on Good Company, the podcast where I sit down with the boldest innovators shaping what's in this episode.

[Ed Zitron]

I'm joined by Angeli Sud, CEO of Tubi.

[Jason Kint]

We dive into the competitive world of streaming.

[Michael Kasin]

What others dismiss as niche, we embrace as core. There's so many stories out there and if you can find a way to curate and help the right person discover the right content. The term that we always hear from our audience is that they feel seen.

[Jason Kint]

Listen to Good company on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Ed Zitron]

Media. I get on their ass. Somebody's got to do it. This is better off flying a Med Zitron. Today I'm joined by the wonderful Jason Kint, who has been at the Google Ads trial and multiple other FTC and DOJ related trials as well. Now, last week we had wonderful news. The Department of Justice won their antitrust trial against Google, saying they have a monopoly over ad tech. This is a wonderful time. And Jason, of course last year was here for multiple episodes with us to walk us through the trial. He was there in person. Jason, how are you doing?

[Jason Kint]

I'm good thank you. It's good to see decisions starting to come in from the courts on what we've been talking about.

[Ed Zitron]

And just to be clear, Jason is the CEO of Digital Content Next. I did not say that at the top. It's the professional podcast run by a professional. But so walk us through what the verdict was.

[Jason Kint]

This is the adtech case against Google that was in Virginia to remind the listeners, and it was around Google having market power and monopoly power on the buy side, the sell side, and in the exchange and then illegally using that monopoly power. The decision from the judge was that mostly in agreement with the plaintiffs and it was a big win for the Justice Department, who worked really hard on this case, that they have monopoly power in the exchange, so where the auctions actually happen, and then on the publisher side with the ad server marketplace that determines what ads land on the page and that they illegally tied those two products together. So the only part of the decision, which I think Google's trying to make to be a bigger deal than it probably is, is that they, the judge did not agree that there was this market on the buy side the way it was defined.

[Ed Zitron]

And so what does that mean in simpler terms?

[Jason Kint]

In simpler terms, it could affect where remedies go, because there is not a finding that they illegally use monopoly power on the buy side with advertisers buying ads.

[Ed Zitron]

And so just they owned the technology to sell the ads and the ways in which it was sell. Like, I guess, yeah, they, they, they.

[Jason Kint]

Still, it's true that they have significant influence because they have their largest player on the buy side of ads. So where advertisers are actually buying the ads, but not that they, she didn't find that they had, that there was a form legal market there that they abused. And so as we go through remedies discussions, I think it's probably, it might be less likely that there's some sort of structural separation where they need to divest the buy side too. Although all this stuff's frankly going to get tangled together and, and it will be a whole new ball game with remedies, especially with search remedies going on this week too. So go ahead.

[Ed Zitron]

I was going to say, like, so what are the remedies that the Department of Justice is actually seeking here on.

[Jason Kint]

The ad tech case? On this case, it's a structural separation of their roles in the ad tech marketplace. And so that was very clear coming into the, into the trial.

[Ed Zitron]

So just break it down for me though, what they, how would they break up Google in its current form? Is that even possible?

[Jason Kint]

I mean, yes, absolutely. In the simplest way would be forcing Google to divest, which probably would mean spinning off to its shareholders rather than selling, because it's going to be such a valuable asset.

[Ed Zitron]

But actually like a separate company.

[Jason Kint]

A separate company that is the ad server marketplace. Yeah. And. And the exchange itself too. So.

[Ed Zitron]

So dumb guy question for you. What is an ad server in this case? Like, how. How does this actually break down?

[Jason Kint]

It's the, you know, it's the technology that sits on the web pages or on the publisher makes the decision on what ad to serve on the page. So when you're browsing a webpage or on an app, it's what's deciding to serve the ad.

[Ed Zitron]

And so Google ran that themselves. They, like, they ran that themselves. So they ended up prioritizing their own ads, I'm guessing.

[Jason Kint]

Yes, that's the case. And so, and you know, in the findings, what's really interesting is that the judge very much agreed with and understood that Google's illegal conduct in terms of how they were able to manipulate auctions in ways that probably favored them and certainly harm the publishers was a part of the binding. So.

[Michael Kasin]

Yeah.

[Ed Zitron]

And when they, when you say they harm the publishers, is it just the. It wasn't possible to compete with Google on ads because Google both made ads and then had the platform that showed the ads to people.

[Jason Kint]

You know, she. She hit on a number of things that I think are gonna be super interesting in the remedies she hit on that Google was able to keep charging 20% of the exc. Exchange market, so they could take 20% of every single transaction and that that price never moved from 20% for the most part because of their monopoly power. But she also hit on all the ways that they can manipulate the auctions, which could end up being. That's a bigger issue when you start thinking about the private lawsuits that are out there too. You get into literally tens of tens of billions of dollars of potential harm to publishers from auction manipulations.

[Ed Zitron]

And how were they manipulating auctions, just so we understand?

[Jason Kint]

Well, the allegations were that in what she addressed in the opinion were things like first look and last look, where they actually were able to see the prices ahead of time or at the end of the auction and make decisions based on the. The bids that they uniquely were able.

[Ed Zitron]

To do, which is so insane that they were able to like, they basically set prices, like get everyone to bid and then just immediately beat them. Like, it's. It's shocking. That's the thing. It's Kind of flagrant.

[Jason Kint]

So with Last Look, I think, you know, I think I've hit on two things here. One, one last look, which I think the judge very much understood because I can remember her, you know, who was completely new to this marketplace. She totally got why that was an issue when she, you know, last look, if you take to like a silent auction where you put your little bids down in an envelope and everybody has kind of their secret bid, this would be like Google then at the end was able to look at everybody's bids, see what the highest bid was and then bid higher if they wanted. That was Last look and there were a bunch of other things that stemmed from that and she really seemed to understand it, which is, it's, you know, it's nice to see.

[Ed Zitron]

So kind of impressive to see a judge just pick up an entire subject matter like that.

[Jason Kint]

I totally agree. You know who I be should be most scared frankly by this opinion is if I'm Facebook or Meta who is like counting on this idea that the judge in their case doesn't know or use social media and TikTok and Instagram, etc. It tells you once again that a judge that understands the law and sits there for four weeks plus all the pre trial stuff and listens to the evidence can understand these issues. And the most important ingredient I think was the Justice Department who really understood the case in a way that they could dive deep and then explain it to the judge and they succeeded to do that.

[Ed Zitron]

So it kind of reminds me, so during some of the Google Ads trial things you talked about the spaghetti thing where they were trying to do this kind of sleight of hand thing and like it's too impossible to understand. No, it's too complex. And they turned it into that ridiculous thing.

[Jason Kint]

That's right, they did. And yeah, and that tells you that that is not going to be a successful defense is trying to confuse a judge who has never used, ever would understand ad tech. That's, that's not going to work. The Justice Department succeeded in explaining it. They kept it simple.

[Michael Kasin]

Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile. I don't know if you knew this but anyone can get the same Premium Wireless for $15 a month plan that I've been enjoying. It's not just for celebrities.

[Jason Kint]

So do like I did and have.

[Michael Kasin]

One of your assistant's assistants switch you to Mint Mobile today. I'm told it's super easy to [e-mail] Switch upfront payment of $45 for three month plan equivalent to $15 per first three months only, then full price plan options available, taxes and fees extra. See full [e-mail] the big guests continue on Las Culturistas. This week, it's the very funny Amy Poehler. Don't overthink it. They talk water. We did not drink water growing up. Water was not a thing. Parenting, you got teen boys. This is like the black diamond of parenting. And of course, I don't think so, honey. Horror movies. Okay, okay. Amy Poehler is on Las Cole culture. The latest episode is out now. Listen to Las culturistas on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you listen to podcasts.

[Charlamagne Tha God]

Peace to the planet. I go by the name of Charlamagne Tha God. And guess what? I can't wait to see y'all at the third annual Black Effect Podcast Festival. That's right. We're coming Back to Atlanta, Georgia, Saturday, April 26th at Pullman Yards. And it's hosted by none other than Decisions, Decisions. Mandy B. And Weezy. Okay, we got the R and B Money podcast with Tank and J. Valentine. We got the Woman Evolved podcast with Sarah Jake Robinson. The Funky Friday podcast with Cam Newton. The Naked Sports podcast with Carrie Champion. Good Mom's Bad Choices podcast, the Trap Nerd podcast, and many more will be on that stage live. And of course, it's bigger than podcast. We're bringing the Black Effect Marketplace with black owned businesses, plus the food truck court to keep you fed while you visit us. All right, listen, you don't want to miss this. Tap in and grab your tickets [e-mail] podcast festival.

[Michael Kasin]

There's a lot in life that feels like it should be guaranteed that just isn't. Fortunately, AT&T guarantees. Guarantees connectivity you can depend on or they'll make it right. AT&T connecting changes everything. Terms and conditions apply. Visit att.com guaranty to learn more. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, Think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ad supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, iHeart's twice as large as the next two combined. So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only iHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business? Think iHeart streaming radio and podcasting. Call 844-844 iHeart to get started. That's 844-844, iHeart.

[Ed Zitron]

So what happens next? What are the next moves with this pub?

[Jason Kint]

Well, a reminder, this is the what. What's called the Rocket Docket, the Virginia District, Eastern District of Virginia. And so the judge moved really, really fast. That's why they have that name. This case was filed in January of 2023. And so we got to a trial, you know, 18 months later in a decision that took, you know, frankly, the decision took a lot longer than anyone thought it was going to take to come out. People were starting to get nervous. But, you know, it just took time. And she clearly wrote a really clear opinion and it's, it's very, it's very easy to read through. So that keeping in mind, I think she'll probably move fast. They have a meeting. I think it'll be tomorrow. In terms of what's the schedule going forward for remedies. And so I would expect the dates to all be in the next few months.

[Ed Zitron]

But what would the remedies be? So they would have to break off the three part, like the ad side, they would have to break off the sell side. Like, what are they going to have to do in theory? I realize you're just guessing.

[Jason Kint]

I'm just guessing. You know, the findings are clear enough that there's going to be structural separation that they're going to be pushing for. You know, how the buy side gets handled is going to be really important. Because a reminder, and this doesn't come out really in the proceedings as much, but the ad tech case is downstream from the search case. And the arguments were that the reason Google was able to dominate the buy side and the sell side in ad tech was because of the monopoly power in search, which we also have remedies now that started on Monday. And so these things are going to start to swirl together. And when you think about Google having to divest Chrome and some of the other remedies within the search case, it's quite possible that there'll be some larger settlement that will be proposed or a larger structural separation that needs to play out between the two decisions.

[Ed Zitron]

So as, as you've been hinting at, there was the, there was the verdict last year that Google did have a monopoly over search. How do you think that these two things are going to play together? You kind of got it there. But what are the ways in which this could go?

[Jason Kint]

Well, the search decision was not. There were two monopolies that they were found of abused. One was search, the other was search text ads. So it was the ads that we see in search, which is Google's largest business. Right. And so just so I'm clear, you're.

[Ed Zitron]

Saying that there's the monopoly over a Search engine and then the advertising on said search engine.

[Jason Kint]

Exactly. And so, and that advertising on said that advertising on said search engine is, is what allowed them, according to the Justice Department, to then dominate in the ad tech stack. And so I think that's the connection point between the cases and will also start to be a part of the discussion in the remedies. Both cases involve network effects. Both cases involve using data to maintain market power and to abuse it.

[Ed Zitron]

Right. So the potential remedies, it sounds like, could be almost breaking up Google into multiple different companies.

[Jason Kint]

With this case, the baby bell's idea of what happened to AT T should be much more what happened there just for the listeners, they divided ATT up into pieces and so not just forcing them to invest one piece of their business. And so with the ad tech case, again, there's settlements that can happen, there's appeals that will happen. But the argument for, you know, should Google have to divest not just its advertising ad tech business, but also, you know, other areas of its business, I think becomes much stronger. You can imagine Chrome, you can imagine Android, you can imagine YouTube.

[Ed Zitron]

Yeah, actually, here's a good question for you. I, I know Chrome and I'm sure many listeners know Chrome as a free browser, not really a business entity. How does selling off Chrome meaningfully help with the monopoly situation?

[Jason Kint]

Chrome, you know, Google's entire advertising business is based on targeting ads, based on signals that it in data that it gathers from the various ways that it can touch the user. And so Chrome as a web browser is an incredible way to harvest data about how you're browsing the web and where you are, location, search, et cetera. And so where Google believes it has permission to use that data to target ads and train its into its machine learning and AI training, that is very valuable.

[Ed Zitron]

I didn't. So wait, so this is perhaps I'm very stupid. So Chrome collects data on your browsing habits for every user, not for every user.

[Jason Kint]

There's privacy settings and all sorts of things you can do. You can go into incognito mode. But if Google is acting as your browser, it has access to your browsing history and what you're doing on the web. And they can, where they believe they have the rights, they can use that data to help provide further information on both for search, but also for what content to serve up and what ads to serve up. What they're actually doing becomes a bigger question.

[Ed Zitron]

Right, so was that established at all at trial?

[Jason Kint]

Not it was in the search, in the search case that. But it was More specifically focused on the default settings for search from the browser. Right. And so within Chrome, if you type in your location bar, you're always going to be doing a Google search that it's pretty clear that how that data then gets passed from the browser to the search engine.

[Ed Zitron]

Yeah. And if they have billions of users, then they can. Everyone is searching using Google because they have. Because it's the default. That's so crazy. But the thing with Chrome as well is it isn't a revenue driver. Is it like a direct source of revenue for Google?

[Jason Kint]

You know, it's. If you, if you think about the search case again, I mean, Google was paying Apple, you know, $25 billion. Let's say, I'm estimating 20 was. It was 20 billion a few years ago, but let's say $25 billion they were paying to Apple to be the default search on Safari and all of the access points on iOS. So Chrome technically is making revenue off of those search queries. It's just Google's paying itself. Right. And so that's the, that's the issue.

[Ed Zitron]

Well, the reason I bring that up is one of the remedies, the idea of selling Chrome off. Why would you, like, what value would there be in Chrome if the whole value of it is to just be kind of a flume towards Google, almost like a marketing arm of Google. If you sold off Chrome, surely it wouldn't have as much business value.

[Jason Kint]

It wouldn't have as much business value to Google. The whole point would be it'd be an independent business that would be making decisions. I mean, technically a browser is supposed to be a user agent. It's supposed to be making decisions for the user and what, what they value. Right. So a new.

[Ed Zitron]

As an autonomous business, like. Yeah, because right now it is. It's not like people pay for credit. It just doesn't feel like that is a practical thing to do. Because if the whole value proposition of it is that it's a free product that makes Google money and it doesn't make any money for anyone else or like it isn't. You know what I mean?

[Jason Kint]

Yeah. So it could make a decision to point to a new Amazon search site or a.

[Ed Zitron]

Sure.

[Jason Kint]

But where somebody else that gets into search. Right. And get paid for it.

[Ed Zitron]

Right. Yeah. I mean, it almost feels like this could lead to, I'm not going to say the death of Google in the sense that Google will cease to be, but the death of modern Google as.

[Jason Kint]

We know definitely all leads towards a very different Google, whether it be structurally different or just being ham strong by the appeals of all these cases.

[Ed Zitron]

So I mean, it's, they. I could not think of anyone who got more lucky than it being Good Friday than Google right now. Because it's good. We're recording this on Good Friday and it's like they didn't like the markets are closed. So they didn't immediately get the markets just pummeling them as they should because they've lost both now. They don't like whatever appeals they may do are not going to really. I don't think they're going to stop everything.

[Jason Kint]

Markets are complex. I would, I would hesitate to wonder, you know, to predict why the stock did what it did yesterday, even when the announcement came out. You know, there are some arguments that having to divest, you know, divest parts of the business could actually create more value back to shareholders.

[Ed Zitron]

What value would that be?

[Jason Kint]

Well, typically when you spin things off, you often see or you sell things often the stock can go up because of that. And so is the sum of the parts worth more than the whole. Those questions all come into play, but that's all up to the markets. And sometimes the markets aren't as smart as we think they are and they take time to understand and unpack things.

[Michael Kasin]

The big guests continue on Las Culturistas. This week it's the very funny Amy Poehler. Don't overthink it. They talk water. We did not drink water growing up. Water was not a thing. Parenting, you got teen boys. This is like the black diamond of parenting. And of course, I don't think so, honey. Horror movies. Okay, okay. Amy Poehler is on Las Culta. The latest episode is out now. Listen to Las culturistas on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you listen to podcasts.

[Charlamagne Tha God]

Peace of the Planet. I go by the name of Charlamagne Tha God. And guess what? I can't wait to see y'all at the third annual Black Effect Podcast Festival. That's right. We're coming Back to Atlanta, Georgia, Saturday, April 26th at Pullman Yards. And it's hosted by none other than Decisions, Decisions. Mandy B. And Weezy. Okay, we got the R and B Money podcast with Tank and J. Valentine. We got the Woman Evolved podcast with Sarah J. Grand, the Funky Friday podcast with Cam Newton, the Naked Sports podcast with Carrie Champion, Good Mom's Bad Choices podcast, the Trap Nerd podcast, and many more will be on that stage live. And of course, it's bigger than podcast. We're bringing the Black Effect Marketplace with black owned businesses plus the food truck court to keep you fed while you visit us. All right, listen, you don't want to miss this. Tap in and grab your tickets [e-mail] podcast festival.

[Michael Kasin]

There's a lot in life that feels like it should be guaranteed that just isn't. Fortunately, AT&T get guarantees connectivity you can depend on, or they'll make it right. AT&T connecting changes everything. Terms and conditions apply. Visit att.com guaranty to learn more. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting? Think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than ad supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, iHeart's twice as large as the next two combined. So whatever your customers listen to, they'll hear your message. Plus, only iHeart can extend your message to audiences across broadcast radio. Think podcasting can help your business? Think iHeart streaming radio and podcasting. Call 844-844-iHeart to get started. That's 844-844-iheart. This is Courtside with Laura Carrenti, the podcast that's changing the game and breaking down the business of women's sports like never before. I'm Laura, the founder and CEO of Deep Blue Sports and Entertainment, your inside source on the biggest deals, power moves and game changers. Writing the playbook on all things women's sports, from the heavy hitters in the front office to the powerhouse women on the pitch. We're talking to commissioners, team owners, influential athletes, and the investors betting big on women's sports. We'll break down the numbers, get under the hood and go deep on what's next. Women's sports are the moment, so if you're not paying attention, you're already behind. Join me Courtside for a front row seat into the making of the business of women's sports. Courtside with Laura Carrenti is an iHeart women's sports production in partnership with Deep Blue Sports and Entertainment. Listen to Courtside with Laura Carenti Starting April 3rd on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts brought to you by Novartis, founding partner of iHeart Women's Sports.

[Ed Zitron]

Yeah, I agree, and I've seen the same thing with Core Weave recently, which is a company that has driven me insane. Onto onto more sane things though. So we're recording this. It's going to be next week, but the beginning of the remedies for the search trial is on the 21st, so what can people expect there?

[Jason Kint]

I don't think there's Going to be as much excitement and drama as we saw with the, with the actual liabilities trial. I think for the folks that follow the industry closely, what you should expect is all the AI companies are involved either through depositions, discovery and some testifying. So you've got anthropic OpenAI Microsoft. So when you think about the shaping of the AI world going forward, you're going to have all the major players. Apple is, Apple tried to actually intervene and, and but the judge didn't allow them. So they've, they've got a strong interest because they've got estimated to be, I think 10 to 15% of their profits are tied to their Google deal.

[Ed Zitron]

Right? Well, because Google pays them to use just, just for the listeners. So Google pays Apple billions to have to be the default search, right?

[Jason Kint]

That's right. And the remedies are that they can't do that anymore. And so the reason they weren't allowed to intervene according to Judge Mehta was because he didn't see a difference in Apple's interests from Google's interests. He basically said yeah, you have the same interests.

[Ed Zitron]

Yeah, well I mean the interest being that Apple needs Google to keep their monopoly so that Apple can keep getting a chunk of their revenue.

[Jason Kint]

That's exactly right. Yeah. So Apple cares a lot, Microsoft cares a lot. All the big players care. The testimonies is going to be a lot of experts and less CEOs who.

[Ed Zitron]

Will be doing the testimonies.

[Jason Kint]

It'll be experts from both sides, so academics that study these issues. It will be executives from the AI companies. I think we'll probably hear from Eddie Q again at Apple who's one of their top executives. We'll probably hear from Sundar Pichai again from Google as CEO. They're on the list.

[Ed Zitron]

So and so in those two weeks what's going to happen? So it's basically another trial to say how they will deal with their monopoly in search.

[Jason Kint]

That's right. And what I mean, I guess one thing that's interesting is they're still pretty far apart. So Google's proposed remedies for itself are basically a slap on the wrist and you know, kind of, kind of embarrassing for anybody on, you know, that studies these things.

[Ed Zitron]

So when you say a slap on the wrist, is it like a fine that offering. What is Google offering them?

[Jason Kint]

They're offering some restrictions on the way they do things but nothing that touches on structural separation in any way, shape or form. Nothing that that prevents them from doing an Apple like deal. And so it's you Know, the min, the bare minimum, that the only way I can read it, and I'm just, you know, spitballing here, but is that they're not giving an inch right now because they think either they can do some sort of transactional deal settlement with the current administration or that they can win on appeal and they don't want to show their cards by moving the line in any way because it's so far removed from the decision itself.

[Ed Zitron]

Right. Because if they got defensive, then they would kind of reveal their hand for when they go to appeal. You're saying.

[Jason Kint]

That's right. That's right.

[Ed Zitron]

And so what is the Department of Justice. So the Department of Justice is saying they should sell off Chrome or is there anything else they're asking for?

[Jason Kint]

They should sell off Chrome and, you know, divest Chrome. They may need to divest Android, but it basically says, let's see how that goes. But we can still do that. And then, very importantly, they're requiring them to share some data with other search engines that would help other search engines have a more level playing field. And as it relates to publishers who, again, I do a lot of work for the. I work for the publishers. It requires Google to allow publishers to narrowly define what Google can crawl and use data for. And so the publisher can say, hey, you can crawl my website for the purpose of search, but you cannot then use it to train your. Your AI engines.

[Ed Zitron]

So, yeah, and so the DOJ is pushing to make sure that's the case.

[Jason Kint]

The DOJ is very smartly understanding that if they don't put real constraints on Google around AI, then they're only addressing past behavior, but they're not actually making sure that there's a level playing field going forward in which you will. Won't be able to just abuse and run over the AI marketplace too.

[Ed Zitron]

It really feels like we're kind of on the precipice of something changing in the next few years with the web. Because if Google has to even share data from search, that will change. We will get competition in search for the first time really meaningfully in decades. Like decades, I guess, since the Lycos and altavista days, because these two cases are so inherently intertwined.

[Jason Kint]

Absolutely. Yeah. And don't shortchange Gopher or web crawler in that.

[Ed Zitron]

Yeah.

[Jason Kint]

But, yeah, there hasn't been another search engine since the late 90s.

[Ed Zitron]

Oh, yeah. Oh, no, I think I said Excite, like so. Okay, changing gears before we wrap up, you've been at the FTC case with Meta. How's that Going and also what is that about?

[Jason Kint]

So that is about whether or not when Meta and Facebook at the time acquired Instagram and WhatsApp, that they were doing that to maintain their monopoly power in a market for personal social networking services. And so that is actually explicitly to break up Meta, so force them to divest WhatsApp and Instagram. And the testimony I saw was Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO who was on the stand for, I don't know, roughly seven or eight hours, which is a lot for any CEO. He's the key witness. And so now they're rolling into the other witnesses. I think it's going well to answer your question. Yeah.

[Ed Zitron]

So what are some of the highlights of things that Marky Mark said?

[Jason Kint]

He, you know, he confirmed there's a lot of emails in that case. And unlike the Google case where there was real problems with preservation of evidence and there were emails that were, and messaging that were deleted and all sorts of things that, by the way, Google's Kent Walker got slammed by the judge for, for not preserving evidence for like the third or fourth time now.

[Ed Zitron]

And you, you mentioned that during our interviews as well, that the judge was pissed about this.

[Jason Kint]

The judge was pissed. And it came out in her opinion. Yeah, that abusive of attorney client privilege. She basically said the only, the way I read it was the only reason I'm not sanctioning you is because I found you liable of breaking the Sherman Act. So and that's kind of what happened in the search case too. And it's kind of in the App Store case they did get sanctioned. So there's the third antitrust loss that Google has in which they've been nailed by the judge and they've got more trials coming. So it's a problem for them. So the difference, the flip side of that is that Facebook and Meta, there's a wealth of emails and Mark clearly ran the company very tightly and drove the product decisions very tightly and he documented a lot of that emails and some of them are pretty damning. You know, I think the one that has always gotten the most attention is emails where he discussed why would we buy Instagram and focused in on the reasons of neutralizing a competitor and buying time. So neutralizing Instagram and buying time and a lot of the contemporary contemporaneous evidence shows that they were very, very concerned over 1 year to 18 month period where Facebook was behind in moving to mobile. Instagram was growing very, very quickly and they had screwed up by building the Facebook app for HTML5. That's a technical thing. Instead of their own native app and they were freaking out and there's a lot of emails about that.

[Ed Zitron]

That's fascinating. So kind of returning to what I was saying previously as well, it feels like the results of these trials could just fundamentally rebuild the web. Because if Instagram was competitive with Facebook, by which I mean they had to spin it off and make it its own company, and Google could no longer monopolize all the parts of the ads, it's going to change the economics of everything underlying the Internet. Because the Internet is mostly paid for by ads.

[Jason Kint]

That's right. That last part's really, really important, Ed, that you're making is. Yeah, we're talking about a lot of the user behaviors and stuff, but there's 100, whatever, 40 billion dol of US digital advertising that goes to those two companies. I would get estimating. And so most of the growth in digital advertising over the last decade has gone to Google and Facebook in some way, shape or form. And so how does it affect the advertising business becomes really, really important to all of us.

[Ed Zitron]

And the way it would affect it is it could be cheaper for advertising, but it could also be more chaotic because especially with Meta's advertising product, from what I understand, it's like almost the equivalent of Google Max in that you put, you give Meta money and it goes into the greater metaverse. I don't mean, I mean that with cat. Damn, I can't say that shit. But goes into the greater meta series of products in the same way that Google Maps. You put money in and it goes across all of Google's stuff that being broken up would be like Google like 90 something percent of of Meta's revenue is ads as well. Like this would destroy the company potentially.

[Jason Kint]

Yeah, they've, you know, they're 96, 97% of their business is advertising. And so you imagine a world where advertisers are buying through a different buy platform or a neutral one, let's call it a neutral one, that actually can buy ads on Instagram versus the Facebook app and actually make decisions on that in real time of what's best for the advertiser.

[Ed Zitron]

I feel like they also have to compete for business in the way they've never had to or like justify their business and provide analytics that they don't already.

[Jason Kint]

I've always asked the question of like when Facebook started to really get described as a toxic waste dump in like 2018, 2019, where they started to just run into some real difficulties like Instagram. If I were Instagram, I would act differently if I wasn't part of the, of the, the larger corporation. Right. And they probably. Instagram would have put the screws to Facebook at that time and vice versa, you know, and so it really changes the dynamic of those two platforms where they're actually having to compete with each other both for users and for ads. The parent company, the brand is, you know, one of the least, you know, according to, like, the Axios reputation survey, it's like number 99 or something like that in the 100 brands. So, like, the brand is significantly challenged despite the success of the company. So.

[Ed Zitron]

So as we wrap up, it almost, I, I know that we, like this show is not necessarily the most optimistic, but I kind of feel a little optimistic seeing all of this stuff. It feels like there could be a better Internet that comes out of it.

[Jason Kint]

I agree with that. And I also, you know, make a broader point that it does make me optimistic to see courts doing what they're supposed to be doing. Judges actually understanding the complexity of technology, having, you know, attorneys that can describe it to the courts in a way that, that, you know, can be applied to antitrust law that's been around for more than a century. And by the way, it should be said, too, that these cases were brought by the Trump administration through a Biden administration administration. Now they're being enforced, and we're getting decisions under Trump administration again. So they're incredibly bipartisan. And I had a chance to testify a few weeks ago in front of the antitrust committee, and that was incredibly bipartisan, too. And so these are. These are issues that stretch across the parties that are. Was pretty unique in this, in this current moment.

[Ed Zitron]

And it kind of feels like that the doomerists out there are saying, oh, he'll. They'll just pay off Trump. But. And it doesn't even feel. It feels like the administration's. Both of them kind of had the same willingness to do this.

[Jason Kint]

That's right. I mean, the Wall Street Journal reportedly.

[Ed Zitron]

We don't know.

[Jason Kint]

Well, yeah, but the Wall Street Journal reported that, that Mark Zuckerberg met with the Trump. With Trump administration or Trump himself, I think, three times in the last few months and offered to settle for $450 million, and the FCC wanted $30 billion. And so you can see that there's a pretty, a pretty big delta between the two. And I think the Trump administration understands why these issues are issues regardless of party and politics. And too much power in the hands of, you know, too little people is always a problem, so.

[Ed Zitron]

Couldn't agree more. All right, Jason, where can people find you?

[Jason Kint]

They can find me on Twitter at Jason underscore Kent on bluesky. They can always email me at DC website. I'm around. I'm always looking to engage. So thank you very much.

[Ed Zitron]

Such a pleasure to have you, sir. And you can of course find me on the Internet Google the man who killed Google search. That's how you find me. This has been Better Offline. I'm Ed Zitron. Thank you. You're gonna hear a very similar message to follow. Thank you for listening to Better Offline. The editor and guideline composer of the Better Offline theme song is Matosauski. You can check out more of his music and audio [e-mail] m a t t o s o w s k-I.com you can email me at ezeteroffline.com or visit betteroffline.com to find more podcast links and of course my newsletter. I also really recommend you go to chat wheresyoured at to visit the Discord and go to R betteroffline to check out our Reddit. Thank you so much for listening.

[Michael Kasin]

Better Offline is a production of Cool Zone Media. For more from Cool Zone Media, Visit our website coolzone media.com or check us out on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. The big guests continue on Las Culturistas. This week it's the very funny Amy Poehler. Don't overthink it. They talk water. We did not drink water growing up. Water was not a thing. Parenting, you got teen boys. This is like the black diamond parenting. And of course, I don't think so, honey. Horror movies. Okay, okay. Amy Poehler is on Las culture. The latest episode is out now. Listen to Las culturistas on the iHeartRadio app or wherever you listen to podcasts. In a world of economic uncertainty and workplace transformation, learn to lead by example. From visionary C suite executives like Shannon Schuyler of PwC and Will Pearson of iHeartMedia, the Good Teacher explains the great teacher inspires.

[Jason Kint]

Don't always leave your team to do the work that's been the most important part of how to lead by example.

[Michael Kasin]

Listen to leading by example executives making an impact on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Jason Kint]

I'm Michael Kassin, founder and CEO of 3C Ventures and your guide on Good Company, the podcast where I sit down with the boldest innovators shaping what's next. In this episode, I'm joined by Anjali.

[Ed Zitron]

Sud, CEO of Tubi, we dive into.

[Jason Kint]

The competitive world of streaming.

[Michael Kasin]

What others dismiss as niche, we embrace as core. There's so many stories out there, and if you can find a way to curate and help the right person discover the right content. The term that we always hear from our audience is that they feel seen.

[Jason Kint]

Listen to Good company on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. In the fall of 1986, Ronald Reagan found himself at the center of a massive scandal that looked like it might bring down his presidency. It became known as the Iran Contra Affair. The things that happened were so bizarre and insane I can't begin to tell you. Please do. To hear the whole story. Listen to Fiasco Iran Contra on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.