Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGoogle Erects Cone of Silence Around Antitrust Case
https://prospect.org/justice/2023-09-26-google-erects-cone-of-silence-around-antitrust-case/
The U.S. v. Google antitrust trial is the first major antitrust case of the century taking place amidst a resurgent anti-monopoly movement. Yet it is turning more into a meta news event about the historic lack of public access to the legal proceedings. Public interest in the case has effectively been neutered as Google continues to block open witness testimony and document exhibitions. The main lesson Google appears to have learned from the Microsoft antitrust case from the 1990s is that media scrutiny and bad headlines can sink a corporate defendants reputation, if not its case. Working the refs is probably the best way to sum up Googles novel legal strategy in court, and so far it seems to be succeeding with federal district court Judge Amit Mehta.
The legal team has developed a coordinated effort to deny as much evidence as possible from entering into the public record. Google has opted to dissuade the judge from allowing what it calls confidential business information out into the public, which the firms attorneys argue will only generate clickbait. During the first week, Googles lawyers unveiled its full-court-press obstruction strategy. The defendants raised hearsay objections throughout almost every witness examination run by the Justice Department, especially during that of the star opening witness, former Google chief economist Hal Varian. Documents that Google objected to disclosing included Varians own emails with reporters and an unedited transcript of an interview conducted with news publication CNET. At one point, Googles interruptions became so incessant that even Judge Mehta grew tired with the tactics and pushed back. But hes largely complied with the defendants demands.
Googles pressure campaign continued into the second week, which resulted in over half of the weeks trial taking place in closed proceedings, per an analysis from Matt Stoller. Tuesday morning also began in closed session. By flooding the zone with objections, the company managed to put enough pressure on Judge Mehta to withhold from the public substantial amounts of documents and key witness examinations, including most of the testimony of Apple senior executive John Giannandrea and portions of testimony from Googles VP of finance Mike Roszak. These witnesses were interrogated to build the governments case that Google uses its monopoly over search engine functions to distort advertising markets. It also pays billions of dollars to be the default search engine on Apple and Android devices, which it then weaponizes through revenue-sharing agreements with partners to beat back rival search engines. Even the amount of money Google paid to Apple for default status has been kept secret, even though both are publicly traded companies and the figure represents revenue for Apple and an expense for Google.
When witness examinations take place in a closed trial, the news is only announced that day, and the court can come back into session at any time. During closed-door sessions, members of the press resort to waiting around just outside the courtroom, hoping to catch one of the lawyers to get a comment when they leave. These extensive closed-door sessions also dissuade reporters from showing up at all, unless the trial is their sole dedicated beat. Out in the hallway, one of the attorneys representing the delegation of state attorneys general who have joined the DOJ in the lawsuit mentioned that the truncated public accessibility in the trial was totally unprecedented. Jason Kint, a representative for a consortium of news publishers called Digital Content Next, has been attending the trial since the first week. He remarked that Googles fight to keep evidence sealed from the public helps soften press coverage and embarrassment for the company. Furthermore, he noted that its a tactic to withhold information from regulators and elected officials in the U.S. and overseas, policymakers who could initiate further investigations or use the evidence to crack down on the company.
snip
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
1 replies, 371 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Google Erects Cone of Silence Around Antitrust Case (Original Post)
Celerity
Sep 2023
OP
elleng
(132,190 posts)1. Of course, Working the Refs.
Thanks American Prospect.