Google on Trial – The New York Times

Americans have long been skeptical of big business. Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman all tried to constrain the power of large companies. Their efforts were part of a national culture that long emphasized individual freedom.

In the 1960s, however, a group of conservative scholars began arguing that large corporations had been unfairly maligned. These scholars — led by Robert Bork, then an obscure law professor — made the case that big business was often efficient and innovative. And if a large company did try to take advantage of consumers, these scholars said, a competitor could swoop in and lure away those consumers.

For years, Bork and his allies failed to persuade Washington to embrace their views. But after the U.S. economy struggled during the 1970s, policymakers became worried that antitrust laws were keeping American companies from competing with Japanese and European rivals. Slowly, the Bork view won converts, among both Republicans and Democrats. Since the 1980s, that view has dominated, allowing corporations to grow much larger.

I wanted to tell you this history today because it’s a crucial backdrop to the Google antitrust trial that began this week. That trial is the most significant attempt in decades to undo the Bork consensus.

Google certainly looks like a monopoly by many measures. More than 90 percent of web searches worldwide are done on Google.

This level of dominance can create problems for anybody who isn’t a Google executive or shareholder. The company is so profitable that it can shape government policies through lobbying and donations. Google can potentially hold down wages for anybody who wants to work in internet search: Where else is that person going to go? Google can also essentially force consumers to turn over their personal data to the company; to exist in today’s economy, you need to interact with Google’s various services, like search, Gmail, Google Cloud and YouTube.

“For the past decade, Google and other tech giants have become incredibly powerful and entwined in just about every aspect of our lives,” Cecilia Kang, one of the Times reporters covering the Google trial, told me.

The Justice Department’s case against the company (and a related lawsuit brought by 38 states and territories) argues that Google has unfairly maintained its dominance by paying other companies billions of dollars a year. Payments to Apple, for example, are the reason that Google is the default search engine on iPhones. As a result, the Justice Department says, competitors to Google cannot establish themselves.

Google responds that its success is simply a reflection of the quality of its products. “People don’t use Google because they have to,” Kent Walker, Google’s top lawyer, has written. “They use it because they want to.”

The government’s biggest challenge in winning this case is closely connected to Bork’s framework for antitrust policy. He argued that the most rigorous standard for judging potential monopolies was consumer prices. Only when economic analysis proved that a company was so powerful that it could raise consumer prices should regulators step in, Bork and his allies said. Otherwise, the government was just guessing about when a company was so big as to be problematic.

Who benefits?

Google, of course, charges consumers nothing for its main products. The company makes money in other ways, such as advertisements. The same dynamic exists elsewhere in the technology industry. Facebook does not charge consumers for an account, either. Amazon does charge for products on its site, but often not any more than other retailers.

In recent years, a rising generation of legal scholars has tried to overturn the Bork consensus by arguing that large companies can still do damage even without increasing prices. They can hold down wages, warp government policy, trample on privacy or spread misinformation.

(One member of this rising generation is Lina Khan, whom President Biden named to run the Federal Trade Commission.)

As part of their argument, these critics of big business — the intellectual heirs to Theodore Roosevelt — can point to macroeconomic data. In the four decades since Bork’s view triumphed, wages for most Americans have grown more slowly than either corporate profits or the incomes of the wealthy. Corporate consolidation seems to have been better for a small slice of privileged people, including Google executives, than for most Americans.

In the long term, these critics hope to change the legal standard for evaluating large companies, much as Bork and other scholars slowly did in the late 20th century. Doing so will probably require new laws as well as different attitudes among regulators and judges. Such a project might take decades, if it ever succeeds.

In the meantime, the Justice Department’s lawyers hope to persuade Amit Mehta, the federal judge hearing the case, that Google has violated even the lenient antitrust laws of today.

For more

THE LATEST NEWS

International

• Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, 76, won’t seek re-election. He suggested that Biden and Donald Trump should also make way for “a new generation of leaders.”

• A judge in Texas again ruled that DACA, a program that shields some migrants from deportation, was unlawful.

• The husband of Representative Mary Peltola, an Alaska Democrat, died in a plane crash.

• A former top buildings official in New York City who raised funds for Mayor Eric Adams pleaded not guilty to bribery charges.

• Vivek Ramaswamy, a Republican presidential candidate, said he would fire most federal workers and shut several agencies.

• George W. Bush urged Congress to continue authorizing a program he started to treat H.I.V. around the world, in an opinion piece for The Washington Post. House Republicans have threatened to let it lapse.

Abortion Policy

Pennsylvania Manhunt

• With help from a heat sensor and a police dog, the authorities captured Danelo Cavalcante, a convicted killer who had escaped prison and prompted a 500-officer manhunt.

• People online criticized about two dozen law-enforcement officers who took a group selfie with Cavalcante before he was returned to jail.

Business and Economy

Other Big Stories

Opinions

Two-parent families are the anti-poverty strategy that liberals too often ignore, Nicholas Kristof writes.

Otherworldly: A self-proclaimed U.F.O. researcher presented what he claimed were two mummified extraterrestrial beings to Mexico’s Congress.

The group chat: Finding the right name has become something of an art.

Lives Lived: Len Chandler was an early fixture of the Greenwich Village folk music revival. He sang alongside Bob Dylan and at the March on Washington. Chandler died at 88.

SPORTS

Aaron Rodgers: The Jets quarterback said he would “rise again” after rupturing his Achilles’ tendon.

Baseball’s best team: The Atlanta Braves won their sixth straight National League East title last night.

N.B.A: The league’s board of governors approved a new policy to restrict teams from resting star players in prime matchups.

Manhattan’s new jewel: The Perelman Performing Arts Center, a marble cube nestled near One World Trade Center, is “the most glamorous civic building to land in New York in years,” the Times architecture critic Michael Kimmelman writes. It houses three theaters that can be rearranged in 60 ways, and its translucent exterior glows amber in the evening, as chandeliers cast the silhouettes of theatergoers onto its surface.

More on culture

THE MORNING RECOMMENDS …