DOJ’s push to break Google’s hold: A closer look at proposed Chrome divestiture Part 1

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is pursuing a historic move to address Google’s monopoly in the digital space by proposing the forced sale of its Chrome browser. This comes after Judge Amit Mehta’s August ruling that Google indeed holds monopolistic power in the search engine space. 

Proposed remedies involve separating browsers’ core functionality from other web services and possibly converting Chrome into a public benefit corporation. Google has strongly opposed these suggestions, claiming they would harm its business and increase costs for users.

Also read:

Google’s reign challenged: Ad Tech on the brink of disruption?

The Implications

According to Movement for an Open Web (MOW), an organisation that calls for a free world wide web, Google and Apple’s dominance over the web is rooted in their ownership of Chrome and Safari browsers.

“Apple and Google through Safari and Chrome now effectively control a huge percentage of the Internet’s traffic. This not only means that they now hold vast troves of data about users – which enables their advertising dominance – it also means that they have been able to shut down true competition in large areas of web functionality,” said MOW in a July article.

Google’s Chrome browser is a massive player in the market, with almost 65% of the global browser market share. A forced divestiture of Chrome ⁠can have wider implications on Google’s advertising ecosystem and the broader digital economy.

In this two-part series, Adgully will analyse the possible ripple effects on user experience, innovation in browser technology, and competition in the adtech and search markets.

Mathieu Roche, CEO and Co-Founder of ID5, feels that while Chrome plays a significant role in maintaining Google’s dominance of the digital ads market – particularly in search – the DOJ’s proposed divestiture of Chrome falls short of establishing a truly fair and competitive landscape.

Browsers like Chrome don’t generate direct revenue; instead their viability is closely tied to search advertising. Selling Chrome wouldn’t necessarily prevent Google from maintaining its position as the default search engine. A more effective solution could focus on addressing Google’s control over search ad revenue, creating opportunities for other companies to compete. By doing so, the balance of power in search advertising could shift, eliminating the artificial preference for Google ads and fostering innovation and efficiency among competitors,” says Mathieu Roche.

According to Rajiv Dhingra, Founder & CEO, ReBid, a forced divestiture of Chrome from Google could have profound implications:

• Impact on user experience: Chrome’s tight integration with Google services ensures a seamless user experience. A divestiture could fragment this ecosystem, potentially leading to less intuitive experiences for users and developers alike.
• Innovation in browser technology: Google has been a major driver of browser innovation, with features like WebRTC and Core Web Vitals shaping the web. Breaking Chrome away from Google could slow down this innovation due to resource constraints or misaligned priorities post-divestiture.
• Competition in Adtech and Search Markets: While the separation might level the playing field for smaller competitors, it could also disrupt Google’s ability to leverage cross-platform synergies in ad targeting and measurement. This might lead to more fragmented data ecosystems, complicating marketers’ ability to run cohesive campaigns.
• Broader digital economy ripple effects: Chrome plays a pivotal role in defining web standards. A shift in control might lead to competing standards, increasing complexity for developers and potentially creating walled gardens that hinder interoperability and growth in the digital economy.

Opening doors for competitors

Selling Chrome could disrupt Google’s dominance in the digital ecosystem, opening doors for competitors like Firefox and Brave to innovate and offer privacy-focused alternatives, says Vishal Rupani, Co-founder, Sprect.com.

“Picture this: you walk into a supermarket, and every shelf is stocked with products from the same brand. It’s convenient, sure, but it’s also predictable and a bit boring. That’s essentially what the digital ecosystem has felt like with Google dominating both search and Chrome. Now, with the DOJ considering breaking up Google by selling off Chrome, it’s like opening those supermarket shelves to new, exciting brands,” says Rupani.

He reckons that Chrome’s massive market share of over 60% isn’t just about browsing; it’s about how Google has seamlessly tied its products together. “For advertisers, this has meant a deeply integrated system where ads reach users with near-perfect precision. If Chrome is split off, Google’s ad ecosystem will lose its favourite playground. Competitors like Firefox or Brave could finally step up, creating fresh opportunities in privacy-focused ad tech. Imagine ads that aren’t stalking you because you Googled ‘how to stop snoring’ once at 2 AM.”

He is certain that for the broader digital economy, this could shake things up in a good way. “Ad rates might become more competitive, and smaller companies – often priced out of Google’s ad empire – might finally get a seat at the table. It’s like upgrading from a single, overpriced coffee chain to a vibrant café scene where every shop offers something different. A more competitive browser market could lead to breakthroughs in technology – voice-enabled browsing, better integration of AI, or even tools that genuinely prioritize user privacy. Of course, big changes like this can feel a little awkward at first, like switching from instant noodles to home-cooked meals. But once the dust settles, there’s a chance for a much richer, more innovative internet. And honestly, who wouldn’t want a browser battle royale to keep things interesting?” asks Rupani.

“Google’s ecosystem is like a spider’s web – everything is interconnected. You can’t remove one strand without shaking the entire structure,” quips Shan Jain, Independent Director, Brand Strategist and Marketing Transformation Advisor.

Jain points out that there are immense technical challenges. She likens Chrome to the engine of a high-performance car. “Alphabet’s search, ads, and YouTube are the fuel, oil, and tires. Separating them would mean reinventing the vehicle. Decoupling Chrome from Google’s advertising data is akin to removing Wi-Fi from smartphones – technically possible, but who would buy the phone?”

Jain points out that Chrome’s dominance gives Google unparalleled access to user data, which drives its advertising engine. If Chrome is separated, she explains, it could disrupt Google’s data pipeline, affecting its ability to offer targeted advertising. This could lead to a redistribution of market power, benefiting competitors like Microsoft (Edge) and Apple (Safari).

“When you dethrone a king, the throne doesn’t stay empty for long. If Chrome is stripped from Alphabet, another giant – Microsoft or Apple – will seize the opportunity. Monopoly isn’t a villain; it’s a chameleon," she adds.

The potential consequences of forcing Google to divest itself of Chrome are massive and could have significant implications for Google’s advertising ecosystem and the broader digital economy, says Gopa Kumar, Chief Growth Officer, Successive Digital. According to him, the fallouts could be:

• Google’s money machine: Chrome is deeply embedded in how Google gathers data and targets ads. Ripping it away could seriously disrupt that flow, making their ads less effective and hitting their bottom line. It’s not just about Chrome, it’s about the whole ecosystem Google has built.
• User experience upheaval: Imagine the headaches if Chrome no longer played nicely with Gmail, Search, and Drive! Plus, who knows what would happen to our privacy and data? This move could really shake things up for users.
• A browser renaissance: On the flip side, this could spark a new era of competition among browsers. Maybe we’ll see a burst of innovation, better features, and more focus on user privacy. It’s about time!
• Shaking up the status quo: This could be a game-changer for the whole adtech and search landscape. It might give other players a fighting chance against Google's dominance. Could this mean lower costs for advertisers and more choices for everyone? And let’s not forget the rise of AI-powered search engines like Perplexity – Google might finally have some real competition.

Chrome is undeniably one of the most adopted browsers on the market with about 3.45 billion users around the world, points out Davide Rosamilia, VP of Product, ID5. He feels that forcing Google to sell Chrome could have wider ramifications, particularly in regions like Asia where it dominates mobile usage.

“Browsers play a critical role in everyday life, not just advertising. Browsers also require immense upkeep, which realistically only major tech players could manage. If a tech giant like Amazon or Meta were to acquire Chrome, it might only shift monopolistic dynamics – essentially going from the frying pan to the fire,” says Rosamilia.

The DOJ might be looking for a remedy for Google’s monopoly, but selling Chrome doesn’t necessarily solve the issue, he adds. “Instead, it raises political and practical concerns, including global access and user experience. Ultimately, any decision should balance competition, innovation, and accessibility, and allow Chrome to continue to serve its billions of users.”

(Tomorrow – Part 2: ⁠How feasible is the DOJ’s proposed separation of browser functionality from other web services, and what challenges could arise in implementing such a remedy?)

Also Read: Google faces breakup threat after US DOJ search monopoly ruling