The EU Commission found that Google has been favouring their very own shopping service while demoting those of their rivals as well as the placement of how they are seen in search results online.
This is favoritism or preferential treatment which makes it unethical, regardless of sustainability thereof.
This is a negative thing as a world-wide monopoly of this magnitude should not be allowed to occur at all.
It means that a single organisation can and will continue to gain more power by pushing their own products and services above those of others.
Alternatives should be given an equal chance to compete as there is always a possibility that their products are better or push more boundaries. This can also help to revolutionise technology and assist in areas of research and development.
Without competition, an organisation is given the freedom to behave in any manner they deem appropriate under their own justification of changes. Breeding nepotism into their own ranks and detracting potential customers from the opposition is quickly apparent.
The impact of Google’s practises in this case has dropped competitors’ products in search results by up to 92 percent, with an average of approximately 85 percent (Shona Ghosh, 2017) even though Google’s traffic volume continued to go up consistently.
The current on-going case with Google is an interesting one and will be a record breaking two and a half billion euros fine from the European Commission (Klint Finley, 2017) after a lengthy and very detailed seven years of investigation around the violation of antitrust laws in Europe.
Transparency was given to this when companies from both sides of the Atlantic filed complaints around Google’s online practises and how they were being negatively and systematically affected (Pierre Bertrand, 2017).
The European Commission has stated that Google needs to comply within 90 days otherwise it will face additional charges equivalent to 5 percent of the company’s average daily turnover. Which at the current valuable is approximately 10.5 million euros a day.
This is not the only EU investigation involving Google. There are currently two other large investigations going on simultaneously where Google is believed to be employing similar tactics to prioritise their own products and services while restricting search results of rival organisations.
“Klint Finley” – “Google’s Big EU Fine Isn’t Just About The Money” (2017) – Available from: https://www.wired.com/story/google-big-eu-fine/ (Accessed on 18th August 2017)
“Pierre Bertrand” – “Google’s record-breaking EU fine explained” (2017) – Available from: http://www.euronews.com/2017/06/27/eu-commission-google-antitrust-fine-explain (Accessed on 18th August 2017)
“Shona Ghosh” – “Why Google just got fined €2.4 billion for Google Shopping” (2017) – Available from: http://uk.businessinsider.com/european-commission-explained-exactly-why-google-just-got-fined-24-billion-for-google-shopping-2017-6 (Accessed on 18th August 2017)