Episode Summary: The Monopoly Report - Episode 1: Jason Kent and Alan Chappelle on What's Next for Google

Release Date: October 7, 2024
Host: Ari Paparo
Guest: Jason Kent, CEO of Digital Content Next
Co-Host: Alan Chappelle, of the Chappell Report

Introduction

In the inaugural episode of The Monopoly Report, host Ari Paparo engages in a comprehensive discussion with Jason Kent, CEO of Digital Content Next, and Alan Chappelle of the Chappell Report. The conversation delves into the intricacies of Google's ongoing antitrust trials, focusing on search and ad tech, and explores the broader implications for the global advertising economy.

Observations from the Google Antitrust Trial

Jason Kent shares his firsthand experiences from the Virginia courthouse, where the Google antitrust trial is underway. He highlights the efficiency of the proceedings compared to the previous search trial:

Jason Kent [01:54]: "This one was much more efficient. I was really appreciative of the lack of repetitive testimony."

Kent notes the judge's impartiality, emphasizing that Google was not intimidating the courtroom:

Jason Kent [02:45]: "I saw justice start to play out, certainly a judge that was not in any way intimidated by Google, which is unusual for them in most settings."

Alan Chappelle echoes this sentiment, pointing out Google's usual dominance in controlling narratives, which seemed less effective in this trial:

Alan Chappelle [03:22]: "Google has become very comfortable with owning the larger narrative. It was much more difficult for them to do so here."

Google's Defense Strategy

The discussion shifts to Google's approach in defending against the Department of Justice (DOJ) allegations. Jason Kent critiques Google's initial strategy:

Jason Kent [03:55]: "Their strategy in the beginning was a little bit of trying to confuse the judge and the court on ad tech... They threw everything but the kitchen sink at the judge in the 30 minutes of opening statements."

Kent observes that Google's primary focus was challenging the market definition to undermine the premise of monopoly power:

Jason Kent [04:20]: "They were trying to challenge the market definition and the idea that Google has a monopoly in each of these three markets in the complaint."

Alan Chappelle adds a legal perspective, distinguishing between Google's attempt to frame the case as a "refusal to deal" versus the government's "tie-in" case:

Alan Chappelle [06:54]: "Google was trying to make this into a refusal to deal case where the precedent is much more in favor of Google's line of thinking. The government was trying to make this into a tie-in case, which is a much, much more difficult road for Google."

Duty to Deal Argument

Ari Paparo brings up the "duty to deal" argument presented by Google as an affirmative defense, questioning its effectiveness:

Ari Paparo [05:08]: "Google was saying we created dynamic allocation and it made our ad exchange able to bid into our ad server and we have no obligation to let anyone else do that."

Jason Kent critiques this defense, suggesting it was not central to Google's case:

Jason Kent [05:41]: "I think the refusal to deal argument was a very small part. Google pretended that they won in D.C. for about an hour on the search case... That's just a sidebar."

Kent also comments on Google's reluctance to use a jury trial, favoring a bench trial to mitigate risks:

Jason Kent [07:57]: "Google thought a jury was not necessarily safe for them, so they moved to a bench trial."

Ari adds that certain arguments, like the auction fairness, resonate with the general public:

Ari Paparo [08:38]: "If this is an auction, why does Google get to bid last? It feels unfair... It just feels unfair that everyone raises their paddle and somebody else gets to see that and raise their paddle last."

Impact on Publishers and Remedies

The conversation transitions to the potential ramifications for publishers and the advertising ecosystem. Jason Kent emphasizes the importance of remedies in restoring fair revenue distribution:

Jason Kent [10:07]: "The trial is more important from a remedies perspective than the search case... any sort of disruption in the remedies... can cause headaches and be detrimental to certain publishers."

Ari Paparo elaborates on how spinning out ad tech entities like Adex could redirect more revenue to publishers:

Ari Paparo [11:37]: "More of every dollar goes to your publisher customers."

Kent discusses the complexities of Google's data integration and its impact on YouTube's advertising value:

Jason Kent [12:15]: "The data that flows through... how that data is able to be used increases the value of the actual environment where the ads are running."

Accusations of Evidence Spoliation

A significant part of the trial involves allegations that Google tampered with evidence. Jason Kent explains the situation:

Jason Kent [22:02]: "Google had a senior executive who communicated a litigation hold but later created a chat that deletes automatically within 24 hours unless proactively turned off."

Ari Paparo shares an insider perspective on Google's stance:

Ari Paparo [24:42]: "A friend at Google said they weren't telling people to delete information, but the default settings led to accidental data loss."

Kent highlights the negative impact of these actions on Google's credibility:

Jason Kent [23:51]: "The credibility of Google witnesses has to be challenged because we're not seeing all the evidence... It's really bad in Northern California."

Legislative Implications and Future Outlook

The discussion touches on potential legislative responses, particularly the bipartisan America Act, aimed at addressing antitrust issues:

Jason Kent [31:42]: "The America Act is extremely bipartisan... It directly goes at the issues of the Google case."

Alan Chappelle and Jason Kent debate the likelihood of federal privacy laws passing before antitrust measures:

Alan Chappelle [32:10]: "What comes first, the America Act or federal privacy law?"
Jason Kent [32:19]: "I would think the America Act just because it's a simpler piece of legislation."

Kent underscores the importance of court actions over legislative efforts in the near term:

Jason Kent [33:47]: "The courts are where the action's at."

Conclusion

Ari Paparo wraps up the episode by acknowledging the depth and complexity of the discussions, highlighting the significance of ongoing trials and legislative movements. The episode sets the stage for future discussions, promising continued analysis of Google's antitrust battles and their far-reaching implications for the advertising industry.

Ari Paparo [34:14]: "This was a great conversation... Thank you so much for being here."

Subscribe to The Monopoly Report: Stay informed on the latest developments in antitrust regulations and their impact on the global advertising economy by subscribing to our weekly newsletter at Monopoly Market or listen to our podcast on Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or your preferred platform.