Day 22
Day 22 of the ongoing antitrust trial saw Professor Michael Whinston retake the witness stand, offering a deeper dive into the realms of Google’s search distribution contracts and their alleged anti-competitive effects. A scholar with a grounding in industrial organization and microeconomics, Whinston earlier posited that Google operates within, and potentially monopolizes, several pertinent markets shielded by lofty entry barricades. This week, his discourse veered towards how Google’s contractual arrangements could potentially strangle rivals, limiting their market share significantly.
Whinston illuminated the courtroom on the detrimental ripple effects of Google’s search engine defaults on competition, contradicting Google’s narrative that alternatives are just a click away. The discourse meandered into the intricacies of user behavior online, shedding light on the hurdles to switching defaults. Delving into Google’s internal operations, Whinston elaborated on scenarios envisioned by the tech giant concerning the repercussions of losing search engine default statuses. His line of argument suggested a deep-rooted commitment on Google’s part to clutch onto these defaults, hinting at a hefty price paid to maintain this status quo.
