9 Comments
Nov 10, 2023·edited Nov 10, 2023Liked by Matt Stoller

Incredible coverage, thank you both for devoting the time to this complex matter.

It seems blatantly obvious that a company cannot grow so explosively by sheer innovation (secret sauce, n/w/s), but the obvious must survive our hopelessly byzantine legal system.

Expand full comment

Any chance the three of you could find time to do a roundtable on:

1) In a perfect world, I would reorganize/breakup Alphabet Inc. by BLANK.

However, since we have yet to perfect this world,

2) the current legal possible ways to reorganize/breakup Alphabet Inc. I would employ are BLANK.

Thank you for all your hard work!

Expand full comment

Could we get a bit more coverage, regarding what the government wants to change, what is their ask/remedy to the problem they see?? Do they want to break up google into separate companies, do they want google to share more information with competitors, maybe they want google to stop paying apple and just have apple ask you what search engine you want periodically? Better prices because google and other big tech are screwing consumers over?

What do you all at Big want to see happen? Should the government be asking for more than what they are?

Expand full comment

Hey Matt, I might have a story for you. It involves a recent merger with a food delivery company and some people who are going to be out of work soon through some really bad business decisions. I think it is right up your alley. Do you have an email I can send some of the details to?

Expand full comment

I wrote what follows, closer to the time this article was published. Since then, Big came out with the good news, in the google verdict. See:

https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/boom-google-loses-antitrust-case?publication_id=11524&post_id=139710776&isFreemail=true&r=xm2a7

Here’s what I wrote:

I've got to say how impressed I am, with your and your team's journalism. The earliest fight was for essential transparency. That is: what the court should have done, to begin with. What shocks me, is that your incredible coverage, worked! The court began to operate as it should. This is journalism at its best: getting government (the court, in this situation) to behave itself.

You and your team, are among the reasons why our nation's founders said there needs to be freedom of the press. Very, very, well done!

I'm impressed with the DOJ's antitrust division, also, here.

What I'm underwhelmed by, is google's defense. The way you described the DOJ arguments, was comprehensible. But not so, with the defense. It just came across like a pile of empty verbiage. No meaning. No content. And I'm reasonably educated, yet couldn't follow their incoherent rambling. That may be part of their hiding of evidence strategy: talk much, say squat. I'm waiting with baited breath, to find out if the gods of google get off the hook, or finally become held accountable.

As for a tip, take a look at yahoo as a monopoly, as well. DOJ's antitrust division should go after yahoo, in addition to google. Both have abused their giant status, to censor me. See:

FTC Ref re: Yahoo Blocks:

https://66a15c69-7119-4b1b-9da1-64f21ac565f3.usrfiles.com/ugd/66a15c_abaf9ad4cedc44e6a821fd321bb59ac9.pdf

Google Drive refuses to send verif code:

https://66a15c69-7119-4b1b-9da1-64f21ac565f3.usrfiles.com/ugd/66a15c_5af44d4edc7b46188ad7739e2f00242c.pdf

I believe that yahoo's conduct in my own situation, is yet ever more, of the same tactic of hiding evidence, which google used, when caught with its britches down, being a monopoly. I used that yahoo email account for over a decade, to provide evidence to logical recipients, of a host of criminal efforts.

Keep covering!

Expand full comment