'Google has been very bad': Donald Trump's antitrust threat against Google, more than just a missed phone call?

Last week, former US President Donald Trump casually suggested that Google could be "close to shut down" due to congressional action, raising eyebrows and reigniting concerns about politically motivated antitrust threats against tech giants. While Trump's comments, made during a Fox News interview, appeared to stem from his annoyance over not receiving a phone call from Google following the recent assassination attempt on his life, a deeper analysis reveals a more calculated strategy aligned with conservative efforts to target Big Tech.

"Google, nobody called from Google," Trump remarked, contrasting Google's silence with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's phone call and praise. "Google has been very bad, they’ve been very irresponsible. I have a feeling Google is going to be close to shut down, because I don’t think Congress is going to take it, I really don’t think so. Google has to be careful."

Silicon Valley Money and Anti-Google Sentiment

Trump's antitrust sabre-rattling coincides with a surge in financial support for his campaign from prominent Silicon Valley venture capitalists, including Marc Andreessen, Ben Horowitz, and Peter Thiel, all of whom have publicly expressed concerns about Google's vast power and influence.

Thiel, a long-time critic of Google, has even called the company "treasonous" and has been actively funding anti-Google regulatory efforts for years.

JD Vance: A Conservative Champion for Breaking Up Big Tech

Adding to the intrigue is JD Vance, Trump's Thiel-funded running mate, who has emerged as a vocal advocate for breaking up Big Tech companies, including Google.

"Does Google need to have YouTube? Does Google need to have all these other platforms that are built underneath the Google umbrella? You can make the same argument with Instagram, Facebook, other services of Meta,” Vance stated at a recent Y Combinator event.

Vance's motivation, like many conservatives, stems from his belief that tech platforms are biased against conservative viewpoints and unfairly censor content. “Google and Facebook have really distorted our political process,” he asserted. “If the new mode of acquiring information is fundamentally biased, I think it’s a far bigger threat to democracy than almost anything that’s called a threat to democracy in 2024.”

First Amendment Concerns

This push to use antitrust as a tool to punish tech companies for their content moderation decisions raises serious concerns about potential First Amendment violations. The Supreme Court recently ruled that content moderation falls under the protection of free speech.

"When the platforms use their Standards and Guidelines to decide which third-party content those feeds will display, or how the display will be ordered and organised, they are making expressive choices," Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the majority opinion. "And because that is true, they receive First Amendment protection."

Google: A Monopoly

Meanwhile, in a landmark ruling this week, a US judge declared that Google violated antitrust law, cementing its dominance as the world's default search engine through illegal monopolistic practices. 

"The court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly," stated US District Judge Amit Mehta. His ruling highlights Google's overwhelming control of the online search market, with a 90% share overall and a staggering 95% share on smartphones.

The ruling has been met with praise from US officials, who view it as a crucial step in curbing the unchecked power of tech giants.

"This decision recognises that Google offers the best search engine, but concludes that we shouldn’t be allowed to make it easily available," Google said in a statement.

US Attorney General Merrick Garland called the ruling “a historic win for the American people,” adding that "no company - no matter how large or influential - is above the law.”

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre echoed this sentiment, stating that the "pro-competition ruling is a victory for the American people. Americans deserve an internet that is free, fair, and open for competition."

The case now moves to a "remedy" phase, where potential solutions to address Google's monopolistic practices will be determined. Options could include structural changes to the company, such as a breakup of Alphabet, which would have a profound impact on the online advertising landscape dominated by Google.

Alphabet has announced its intention to appeal the ruling, setting the stage for a protracted legal battle that could drag on for years, potentially reaching the US Supreme Court.

Alphabet's shares tumbled 4.5% on Monday following the ruling, reflecting investor concerns about the potential consequences of the antitrust case. Google's advertising revenue accounts for a significant portion of Alphabet's total sales.