A Taste of its Own Medicine
The Department of
Justice is expected to issue a ruling soon on the antitrust aspects of
a proposed deal between Google and Yahoo!. Supporters of the free
market are generally skeptical of government antitrust action, but
considering the history of Google using the government to harass its
rivals, it seems fitting that Google is now facing government action.
The dangerous precedent championed by Google may now come back to haunt
it.
The issue at stake is whether or not a deal between Google and Yahoo! would essentially create a monopoly for search engine ad spending. If the deal is approved, the Google-Yahoo! combination would control over 90% of this market.
This is not Google's first brush with antitrust law. Of course, previously Google was on the other end of the situation. As the Washington Post noted last year, "Google's Washington office helped write an antitrust complaint to the Justice Department and other government authorities asserting that Microsoft's new Vista operating system discriminates against Google software."
Google has been an aggressive player in the political game since it opened its Washington, D.C., lobbying office. Whereas other Internet companies generally used lobbying to try and persuade the government to leave them alone or provide them with special favors in tax law, Google decided to use its lobbying arm to persuade the government to attack its rivals.
Besides its antitrust actions against Microsoft, Google also supports the misnamed "net neutrality." This policy, if enacted, would involve the government intimately in the pricing and regulation of Internet service. It is a good thing for search engines like Google, however, as it would give them a leg up over Internet service providers.
That, as perhaps Google can now see, is a short-sighted strategy. Where once Google wanted an aggressive enforcement of antitrust law when it applied to Microsoft, now it is trying to defend itself against this kind of aggressive enforcement. Some have a hard time finding sympathy for Google, considering its past actions.
Google decided to encourage government to become involved in regulating the Internet and technology companies. Perhaps it failed to realize that this type of government control could just as easily be turned against it.
In the end, though, it would likely be best for both Internet companies and consumers if Washington, D.C., left the Internet alone to develop and thrive without stifling government oversight. It is a mistake to think that consumers benefit when the government starts picking winners and losers in the marketplace. All too often the government's decisions are based on political calculations, not on what consumers prefer.
Google seems fine with the government rewarding certain companies and attacking others as long as the government is doing Google's bidding. But other companies can influence the government, too, and it's a dangerous game to start down this road. No matter what the Department of Justice decides about the Google-Yahoo! antitrust case, once can hope that Google learns a valuable lesson about the dangers of government power.
Marc Kilmer is a policy analyst with the Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions, a research and educational institute located in Columbus, Ohio.
