‌Manipulating Search Engines

In 2017, the European Commission fined Google 2.4 Billion Euros for Illegally abusing its
dominant position as a search engine by giving prominence to its own shopping-comparison site
over rivals. The company used its monopoly position in the market to gain power in another.
The company has been accused of influencing Google’s generic search algorithms which
resulted in their rival’s comparison shopping services being demoted. Evidence shows that
other highly ranked rival services appear lower on Google’s search result page, typically
appearing on page four making the rival’s shopping services much less visible. Google has
faced allegations that the company has been favoring its own products and services by
prioritizing its content in search engine results. Google had 90 days to stop the abuse or would
face penalty payments of up to 5 percent of daily worldwide turnover.

Privacy and Protection of Personal Data

Google has also clashed with the European Commission over privacy and the protection of
personal data, breaching users’ trust and privacy by utilizing personal information to suggest
connections with its Buzz service. Through its Android services, the company also gathers
location information from mobile users, even when the location services are not activated. The
company’s ability to track user behavior and preferences across its diverse range of services
also prompted questions regarding the ethical utilization of data and potential invasions of user
privacy. This also unveils a vulnerability in privacy security that governments can exploit to
monitor private conversations. Services provided by the company involve the collection and
processing of vast amounts of user data including search, email, and mobile applications often
without the knowledge and explicit consent of users.

Tax Avoidance

Google has been accused of Tax Avoidance in Europe by shifting profits to low-tax countries
such as Ireland. Allegedly Google was billing 92 percent of its non-US sales to Ireland (Public
Accounts Committee 2012). To avoid UK corporation tax, the company has claimed an
argument that lacks credibility, asserting that its sales to UK clients take place in Ireland, despite
having clear evidence that the majority of its sales revenue is generated within the UK. In 2011,
Google’s Ireland sales recorded revenues amounted to €396 million for the services provided by
its 1,300 staff but paid corporation tax of only €6 million, Those services included promoting its
products, providing education training to clients on these products, and making sure that they
worked for UK consumers. This intricate corporate arrangement has damaged Google’s
reputation and has eroded trust in the United Kingdom.

Market Dominance

According to Statista’s 2018 statistics, Google has over 90% market share in the EU, Brazil, and
India and about 80% in the USA having an unfair advantage against competitors like Yelp.
Google has been dominant in general internet search markets throughout the European
Economic Area (EEA) consistently since at least 2008 which is the period investigated by the
European Commission. Research shows that Google has abused this market dominance by
giving its own comparison shopping service an illegal advantage. Following the demotions
applied by Google, traffic to rival comparison shopping services on the other hand dropped
significantly. This has raised concerns about anti-competitive behaviors and the company has
faced legal challenges in response to its market dominance.

Over-reliance on Online Advertising

Axel Springer, the German publishing company, one of Google’s customers, supported the EU
action concerning publishers’ increasing dependence on Google for online advertising and the
traffic generated by it. They saw the company as a menace to the principles and understanding
of the nature of humanity, instilling fear in Google. Publishers have been heavily dependent on
online advertising which may cause challenges in cases of sudden decline in ad spending,
changes in algorithms, policies, or revenue-sharing models imposed by these platforms.
Publishers raised problems with Google as they became vulnerable to shifts in market
dynamics.

Solution:
There's a saying, "There is only one way to avoid criticism: do nothing, say nothing, and be
nothing". It implies that you ought to refrain from acting, voicing your thoughts, and pursuing
your objectives if you wish to stop others from berating or condemning you. In the case of
Google, let's admit Google made things easier and more convenient for us Students and
Workers. Organizing the world's knowledge and making it widely useful and accessible is
Google's purpose. This is the reason why Search makes it simple to find a wide range of data
from a wide range of sources. Certain information is basic, such as the Eiffel Tower's height. As
what Company of Google mentioned in the article, "Creating platforms for other people's
success is a huge part of who we are...The opportunities to improve lives on a grand scale are
endless and these are people around the world whose lives we can improve every day by
bringing information into their homes, into their schools, and into their pockets". This statement
is alive and can be seen in today's current state. However, accusations and criticism were born
in the middle of the Google peaks of victory.

Manipulating Search Engines, Privacy and Protection of Personal Data ,

Tax Avoidance, Market Dominance ,Over-reliance to Online Advertising are the fierced criticism
Google encountered and received from the European Commision national governments and
customers. Thus, Let's see how Google makes things right

Manipulating Search Engines

a. Google was penalized €2.42 billion by the European Commission for violating EU
antitrust laws. By illegally providing its comparison shopping service, another Google
product, with an unfair edge, Google has exploited its market dominance as a search
engine

-If being asked I think Google have the right to do so,because it's their platform ,however I also
get the point of the EU Commission that it's unfair to other rival company of Google. I agree on
what the Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, who oversees competition policy, stated: "Google
has developed a number of cutting-edge products and services that have improved our lives.
That's a positive thing. However, Google exploited its market dominance as a search engine to
promote its own comparison shopping service in its search results while devaluing those of
rivals.
What Google did violates EU antitrust laws because it prevented other businesses from
competing fairly and from innovating. More significantly, though, it prevented European
consumers from having access to a wide range of services and the full advantages of
innovation."

In February 2014, Google made a proposal to address the issues raised by rival retail search
engines. The solution is to include Others As Prominently. This was done in order to display
listings from other shopping search engines next to its own. Sounded fair to me, but other
businesses complained, and trade organization FairSearch even called it "worse than nothing."
Eventually, the proposed deal fell through. The artificial "Alternatives" barrier between Google's
own product listings and those that lead to other shopping search engines may be divided if the
aforementioned plan were reshaped.

Google propose a lot of Possible including Close Google Shopping. It's likely that very few
Google users ever visit the Google Shopping UK website to browse or do searches. Heck, it's
more common for users to just search on Google and receive shopping listings—which are ads
—mixed in with the primary search results, even for the far more developed Google Shopping
website in the US. Another one is by Changing The Web Search Algorithm. If there is a solution,
it probably depends on resolving the initial accusation. In the event that Google were to provide
rival retail search engines with greater exposure within its ad space, they would probably see
growth — provided that they are willing to pay for it, as has been the case for competitors
outside of Google as well. The Google "free ride" has become less and less for everyone. See
also: Facebook.

As an alternative, Google may alter its algorithm to increase the likelihood of rival shopping
websites showing up in its online search results, as they formerly did. Think about this "dvd
players" search once more, but concentrate on the results from the online search. It's to prove
that Google are providing solutions and comprimoses to resolve the Issue.

Additionally,I agree on what Grant Ingersoll, the cofounder and CTO of Lucidworks, a company
that focuses on AI-powered search,said. He mentioned that regarding the need for a white box
search engine, Ingersoll was dubious. Would the average consumer who is drowning in
information and is just interested in finding the solution they need want it? Most likely not," he
stated. Does it really matter why the computer selected a recipe for barbecued chicken if you're
looking it up? The recipes are either to your taste or not."

If you're not into Google, there are other search engines available. Microsoft offers Bing, which
is a perfectly good search engine. For those who value privacy, DuckDuckGo has built its entire
business on being the search engine that doesn't put you in a bubble, doesn't personalize
results to you, and tries to be more transparent about what's going on. In fact, a significant
portion of DuckDuckGo's code base is open source."

Tax evasion/ avoidance

In her leadership campaign, Theresa May, a United Kingdom Parliament member stated, “It
doesn’t matter to me whether you’re Amazon, Google or Starbucks, you have a duty to put
something back, you have a debt to fellow citizens and you have a responsibility to pay your
taxes.” According to a report by Callister (2023), businesses are fully responsible and liable for
their actions, imposing strict rules within the company confines which include informing your
employees and coworkers about tax policies, knowing high-risk fraudulent entities before
sharing investments, developing due diligence strategies or audit investigations for the company
and third-party entities involved, knowing the difference between tax evasion and avoidance,
and report suspicious behaviors through a whistle-blowing hotline.

Tax evasion is an illegal practice made by companies or individuals to escape paying taxes, it is
often an issue with transparency, and rule-breakers are usually fined or punished. This is
different from tax avoidance which complies with legal obligations and instead finds loopholes
with incentives, deductions, exclusions, and credits to lessen or reduce the company’s liability, a
tactic employed by the website to exempt themselves from legal battles; and so, although it
sounds unfair, what the site did to the European Commission is not illegal.

Market domination

The website’s worldwide reach is steadily expanding annually, leading to an imbalance in the
revenue comparison between search engines, making Google in the most dominant position to
control pricing and terms of advertising. This means competitors have a hard time staying afloat
in the industry because of the monopoly the website has with the resources. In July 2023,
Google accounted for around 83.49 percent of market shares while Bing which was on second
place only had 9.19 percent (Bianchi, 2023). This hurts the profitability of other search engines
but leads to continuous development for Google.

Every company wishes for world domination, what the website did would be a sample for a
success story on this aspect. Unfortunately, it comes with its downsides— legal battles against
countries and companies who wish for a more equal market competition. It is understandable for
both sides to fight their battles but it does not deny the fact that Google did no wrong and is only
striving for the top spot like all other brands do.

Over-reliance to Online Ad

As the site is a company operating through the World Wide Web, it is heavily reliant on online
advertising. One of its website partners includes Google Ads (formerly known as Google
AdWords) which makes it possible for Google to gain revenue from sharing media for other
brands. This is a symbiotic relationship wherein the companies advertised gain exposure and
the search engine acquires income from the brands’ shares.

Extensive advertising may lead to obstruction in content-viewing for consumers, and thus
Google is devising strategies to lessen its reliance on ad income with its non-advertising
revenue increasing from just $0.8 billion in 2009 to $20.5 billion (Richter, 2019). This proves that
the website is capable of gaining yield from other means and even shows that Google may still
steadily grow.

 EU is unhappy with Google - Google was fined €2.4 billion by the European
Commission in 2017 for illegally abusing its dominant position as a search engine by
giving prominence to its own shopping comparison site. The company had 90 days to
stop the abuse or face penalty payments of up to 5% of daily worldwide turnover. Google
has been under scrutiny for several years and has already been fined 8.3 billion euros
 ($8.9 billion) for dominance abuses in its mobile operating system and display
advertising operations.

 Publishers have problem with Google - Google's market power and increasing
dependence on online advertising have led to concerns among publishers, including the
Guardian, which withdrew ads from YouTube videos containing extremist content.
German publishing company Axel Springer, a Google customer, supports EU action
against the company, citing its threat to publishers' values, understanding of humanity,
global social order, and the future of Europe.

 Tax avoidance of Google - Google has been accused of tax avoidance in Europe by
shifting profits to low-tax countries like Ireland, billing 92% of non-US sales to Ireland.
The UK Parliamentary Public Accounts Select Committee chair criticized the company
as "devious, calculated, and in my view, unethical" and accused it of "doing evil".