Google, and The Dangers of Monopolizing Speech

"It's like if you were trying to buy a house, and Google owned the house, and a lot of houses on your block. And they were the buyer's agent and also the seller's agent," said Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt. "It would raise questions, certainly."'  This perfectly sums up the idea behind CBS News' article "48 U.S. states launch antitrust investigation into Google."  The article focuses on the lawsuit brought to Google by the attorneys general of all US States, except California and Alabama, as well as the attorneys general of Washington  D.C. and Puerto Rico.  They are investigating weather or not Google has a monopoly on the internet search engine business, and if Google is using this monopoly to push the search results it deems most important.  Google's firm grip on the search engine business leads to them virtually giving the first search result to the highest bidder, as the article explains.  The article highlights the impact of this problem with Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge firmly stating that "When my daughter is sick and I search online for advice or doctors, I want the best ones — the best advice or the best doctors — not the ones who spent the most on advertising[.]"  This best puts into perspective the true danger of Google having a monopoly on one of the main uses of the internet, and using that monopoly to get revenue from people who buy their way to the top, instead of showing the best search results that fit what the individual who uses Google is looking for.  

My take on this issue is that Google has absolutely too much power.  I don't think anyone can really argue the fact that Google as a search engine is the best on the internet, but Google has shown time and time again that they will abuse this title if given the chance.  This article brings to light one aspect of the bigger problem with Google: they routinely silence people who disagree with them.  As i was reading this article, I was bombarded by ads relating to some of my previous Google searches, and whenever I search for something on Google, the first 2-3 results have a little "ad" notification next to them stating that they paid to be at the top.  Now, while these aspects might not seem that bad on their own, making the connection between advertising and free speech begins to shed light on what is going on behind the scenes at Google.  The ads obviously paid to be there, and, as stated in the article, whoever pays Google the most shows up first, which leads to Google treating internet searches as something to monetize, instead of something to help people with.  On the opposite end, Google has notoriously made it harder to find websites or internet searches that they disagree with, and YouTube, who is owned by Google, has begun a wave of banning people who they deem unworthy over the past couple of years.  
         When it comes to this issue, the reason why this is such a big deal is because that the Internet itself is a public place, even though people are not physically gathering there.  So, given what we learned in class about private companies who work in the public sector, the fact that companies like Google and Twitter (who's largest individual shareholder is a former partner of Google's) shut down speech and regulate who can and can't have a voice is dangerous; and the fact that it has taken the American government this long to recognize this is astounding. 

Link to article: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/google-antitrust-probe-48-u-s-states-launch-antitrust-investigation-of-google-dominance-in-search-ads-and-data/