Jason Kint Profile picture
CEO DCN. Media strategy, streaming, antitrust, privacy. @wustl, Sporting News, CBS Sports alum. #HoldTheLine #PressFreedom Hear more at @dcnorg
eDo Profile picture Sue Strong @strong_sue@mastodon.sdf.org 🇺🇦 Profile picture Patrice Daniel⭐⭐⭐ Profile picture Diana Roby Profile picture Hempfelt Profile picture 47 subscribed
Aug 23 29 tweets 10 min read
As I mentioned, there are about 150 exhibits unsealed in last 24hrs for the Google adtech trial 9/9 in EDVA. I can post my highlights here if you find interesting.
Evidence is damning, trial will be lit. Basically Google sees 84% of the addressable ad market. That's insane. /1 Image Google had slides like this which no sane monopolist under actual regulatory scrutiny would ever create. But back in the day... and we wonder why they see 84% of the ad market. /2 Image
Aug 23 11 tweets 4 min read
About to drop a lot in US v Google adtech trial...brace. First, we're going to start with exhibits just unsealed backing up DOJ allegations Google deleted evidence despite a litigation hold. Judge will hear arguments Tuesday. Delays + lack of "produced chats" appear sus. /1 Image But first a PSA, this Google adtech trial starts 9/9. In the last 24hrs, incredible unsealed exhibits (150+) are flying under radar so humbly suggest press adjust focus - this week Google hosted several useless off-record pre-trial briefings with tech press. Read the docs. /2
Aug 19 4 tweets 2 min read
Pardon me. There isn't yet enough discussion about the AI implications of Google's dominance. I want to share a bit of important math in the recent decision that Google not only has monopoly power but illegally abused it. Google sees *19 times the queries of rest of market.* 1/4 Image And we already learned in a landmark UK competition investigation that *15% of daily queries on Google have never been seen before.* This came up a lot at last Fall's US trial - Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce being Judge Mehta's example - as there was a day it was a new query. 2/4 Image
Aug 15 11 tweets 4 min read
Bam. Facebook just filed its brief for Nov 6th SCOTUS hearing. As much as you may think you know the cover-up, you really should read. I will link to Facebook's petition (and response when filed) along with the actual complaint moving fwd in 9th circuit. But two things. /1 Image First, if Justice Kavanaugh doesn't recuse then I argue it's the biggest conflict of interest by SCOTUS this year considering he's best friends and reportedly roomed at home of Facebook's top policy exec - Joel Kaplan, in middle of scandal - during confirmation hearings. /2 Image
Aug 8 33 tweets 13 min read
wow. an amazing 325 page google strategy document quietly unsealed buried in google antitrust docket. It's gonna take a long thread but I have pulled out the gems. It's from 2017 planning, no doubt Google will just say these were only ideas but many will look very familiar. /1 Image For more than a decade, Google has been shifting revenue away from rest of the web to its own properties where it doesn't have to share any of it (I share a chart every earnings backing this up). But here it is spelled out by their own employees as the intentional strategy. /2 Image
Aug 5 26 tweets 10 min read
Sorry, my "bam!" was cryptic.

Google has violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by maintaining its monopoly in two product markets in the U.S....

It's 286 pages - be back with a thread shortly along with implications for the adtech antitrust trial starting in five weeks. /1 Image ok, here we go. I read the 286 pages for those who don't have time. Or to help translate to industry and public minds. This is a landmark decision vs Google. The court has found Google's exclusive deals, primarily with Apple, foreclosed one half of the search market. /2 Image
Aug 5 6 tweets 3 min read
Excellent. Good news for those who care about the public interest in antitrust lawsuits vs Google brought by the United States.
First, Dept of Justice filed over weekend for an "adverse inference" as to evidence purging that surfaced in the app store and search trials. /1 Image Second, several major newsrooms (NYT, Bloomberg, MLex, WaPo) appeared to take lessons from the prior lawsuits as to Google's shenanigans to bury evidence, close the courtroom and spin the press coverage. They've already preemptively filed this wknd to avoid the same issues. /2 Image
Aug 2 8 tweets 4 min read
As we approach US v Google trial (9/9), more docs unsealed. Today, arguments from DOJ unsuccessfully trying to throw out a Google-funded experts' survey producing hundreds of pages of opinions on the current ad market. Most interesting to me, deep in it is a "No Contact" list. /1 Image It's an important work product for Google's defense. another expert called it unreliable. For one, all six of the "Big Six" ad agency holding companies were on the "No Contact" list, five of them accounted for like 2/3 of the ad buying through Google. So yeah, a problem here. /2 Image
Jul 24 11 tweets 4 min read
woah. a deeply concerning internal Google doc just unsealed in US DOJ vs Google (adtech antitrust trial seven weeks from now).
Smells like bid rigging.
Translation (by me):
Red = bad for Google
Green = good for G
'Levels playing field' = helps G
'fairer competition' = helps G /1 Image at the very least, demonstrates the conflict of interest with having significant market power on both sides. here is a Google doc roadmapping these changes to their auctions from the buy-side and the sell-side ahead of analyzing the impact and mitigating outcry. /2 Image
Jul 17 11 tweets 4 min read
more news yesterday in flurry of activity in lawsuit vs Facebook for (over)paying FTC $5B to protect Zuckerberg. Big names involved. Board records inspection shows who's who in 'approval' - everyone now gone except Zuckerberg, Andresseen and Alford. Gets interesting quickly... /1 Image Yes, Andreessen joined Thiel in politics with full-throated endorsement of Trump with close allies. Alford was CFO of Chan Zuckerberg right before approval. WSJ reported Chenault and Zients (important: now Biden's chief of staff) stepped down over disagreements with Mark Z. /2 Image
Jun 22 7 tweets 3 min read
Friday night KA-boom. In adtech antitrust lawsuit against Google, court has ordered the state AGs may depose Google co-founder Sergey Brin and CEO Sundar Pichai. Huge. /1 Image So the two cited reasons Pichai will be deposed (although not all of them) are incredibly sensitive. 1), “Jedi Blue,” the alleged collusion with Facebook that everyone wrongly wrote off back earlier in this lawsuit. Google CEO Pichai met directly with Facebook CEO Zuckerberg. /2 Image
Jun 17 9 tweets 4 min read
US v Google flooded docket (103 filings!) over weekend as Court said Friday...hey now, let's skip summary judgment, this baby is going to trial. Much is companies trying to keep their secrets sealed but we get a sense for the witnesses. And a small taste of evidence to come. /1 Image On the companies filing to keep their secrets sealed which they mostly provided under subpoena, it's a mix of adtech, agencies, platforms, you name it. /2 Image
Jun 10 10 tweets 4 min read
SCOTUS just posted order list. It granted cert to Facebook on its Cambridge Analytica matter. Only first question but that’s a huge one. Basically should Facebook have disclosed to shareholders what it started to cover up in 2015 rather than presenting risk as hypothetical? /1 Image Here is the actual first question as written. One immediate item, it’s outrageous if Justice Kavanaugh didn’t/doesn’t recuse seeing his reported best friend, Joel Kaplan, was directly involved in the matter and its cover up. He threw his SCOTUS confirmation party IIRC. /2 Image
Jun 7 4 tweets 1 min read
“X has lost dozens of major advertisers under Musk’s ownership, with 74 out of the top 100 U.S. advertisers from that month no longer spending on the platform as of May.” 1/4 Smart NBC report focusing on amplification, velocity and reach, “X isn’t living up to its own policies when it allows violent extremists to use the platform’s amplification features.” 2/4
May 31 23 tweets 12 min read
Let’s do this. As I’ve said in the past, nothing makes a statement on important news close to the newspaper front page. Across America, almost every editor went with the simple fact, “Guilty.”
Let’s start with the biggest circulation. /1


Image
Image
Image
Image
I shouldn’t overlook Chicago and Los Angeles, Same. /2
Image
Image
May 23 5 tweets 2 min read
Super smart, important read in Washington Post for regulators, media executives, lawmakers. At a high level, Meta continues to use its market power to suppress all value in brands, news orgs and media companies. Brands are proxies for trust, but profit and data to Meta. /1 Image “These are platforms doing what platforms do, which is trying to optimize the time spent and the data collected. They don’t really have much interest or care for what happens to news outlets or journalists,” said @emilybell. /2
May 17 6 tweets 3 min read
Woah.
Google is effectively trying to buy out the United States by tendering a cashier's check for the claimed max damages from screwing industry with adtech market power abuses. US DOJ's adtech antitrust trial seeking to break them up is months away. 1/4 Image And then with google's payment, they're trying to get it switched from jury to bench trial. The money is an after thought, what they clearly don't want is a jury of Americans reviewing damning evidence (see Bernanke) which may be harder to appeal leading to structural remedy. 2/4 Image
May 14 10 tweets 4 min read
Bam, clock starts. Facebook just filed its reply brief seeking cert from SCOTUS to reverse its early defeat to dismiss a Cambridge Analytica case. This comes 6+ years after Facebook began laundering press using exhaustion and complexity to whitewash facts of the scandal. /1 Image But let's start with preposterous argument from Facebook's amici allies as it's also Facebook's core argument to SCOTUS. Facebook argues the scandal was already widely known in 2015. So no reason to disclose in its SEC risk factors in 2016 or 2017 (when it was covering it up!) /2 Image
May 5 14 tweets 5 min read
Department of Justice has now posted its hundreds of great slides from closing arguments. I’ll share 13 slides that tell story imho captured by this list.
First, if search defaults don’t matter, why pay approx $30B, 40% of revenue to maintain them? 1/13 Image DOJ cleverly took this sentence from the DC circuit opinion in U.S. vs Microsoft and replaced it with Google’s search defaults story in red. “Fits like a glove” as they said to Court on Friday. Hard to argue. 2/13 Image
May 1 5 tweets 2 min read
There is a report going around Apple is going to facilitate blocking of ads in Safari - it deserves your attention. Meanwhile, I want to connect dots w/ a number of redactions lifted (yellow) late last night in the post-trial docs of US v Google - closing arguments are tmw. /1 Image It's critical to understand the importance of Safari to their Google deal under microscope. It's reasonable to say Safari delivers nearly 20% of Apple's Income from Ops almost entirely subsidized by Google. Without Safari, there is no Google deal. /2 Image
Apr 11 4 tweets 2 min read
!!!!! just unsealed, and higher than prior news reports. /1 Image we learned last Fall in a different G lawsuit (NdCal) during widely reported testimony the number 36% as the share Google paid Apple to be locked in as default search across Apple's surfaces.
But now this was just unsealed from the two key contracts (here is 2014 which even then was 37.5%) /2Image