Today on AirTalk, we discuss the Justice Department's antitrust lawsuit against Google and what that means for the company. Also on the show, we preview the the World Series and what to expect from the Dodgers in game 1; we answer your unemployment questions; and more.
DoJ V. Google: The Biggest Antitrust Case In 2 Decades
The Justice Department on Tuesday sued Google for antitrust violations, alleging that it abused its dominance in online search and advertising to stifle competition and harm consumers.
The lawsuit marks the government’s most significant act to protect competition since its groundbreaking case against Microsoft more than 20 years ago. It could be an opening salvo ahead of other major government antitrust actions, given ongoing investigations of major tech companies including Apple, Amazon and Facebook at both the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission. Lawmakers and consumer advocates have long accused Google, whose corporate parent Alphabet Inc. has a market value just over $1 trillion, of abusing its dominance in online search and advertising to stifle competition and boost its profits.
Critics contend that multibillion-dollar fines and mandated changes in Google’s practices imposed by European regulators in recent years weren’t severe enough and that structural changes are needed for Google to change its conduct. The Justice Department isn’t seeking specific changes in Google’s structure or other remedies at this point, but isn’t ruling out seeking additional relief, officials said. Google responded immediately via tweet: “Today’s lawsuit by the Department of Justice is deeply flawed. People use Google because they choose to -- not because they’re forced to or because they can’t find alternatives.”
The case was filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. It alleges that Google uses billions of dollars collected from advertisers to pay phone manufacturers to ensure Google is the default search engine on browsers. Eleven states, all with Republican attorneys general, joined the federal government in the lawsuit. The company, based in Mountain View, California, has long denied the claims of unfair competition. Google argues that although its businesses are large, they are useful and beneficial to consumers. It maintains that its services face ample competition and have unleashed innovations that help people manage their lives.
Today on AirTalk, we’ll take a look at what’s in the Justice Department’s complaint against Google and what this lawsuit portends for possible future government legal action against big tech.
With files from the Associated Press.
We invited the U.S. Department of Justice and Google to join our conversation. Google sent us this blog post in response to our inquiry. As of the airing of this segment, we have not received a reply from the Department of Justice. We will update this page if we hear back from them.
Guests:
David McLaughlin, antitrust reporter at Bloomberg News; he tweets
Chris Sagers, professor of law at Cleveland State University
Shubha Ghosh, professor of law at Syracuse University, where he is also the director of the law school’s Intellectual Property and Technology Commercialization Curricular Program as well as the Syracuse Intellectual Property Law Institute (SIPLI); he tweets
Diving Into Potential Impact Of SF’s CAREN Act, Meant To Deter Racist 9-1-1 Calls
San Francisco’s Supervisors are set to vote today on the “Caution Against Racial and Exploitative Non-Emergencies” or CAREN Act, which gives the targets of racist 9-1-1 calls the right to sue the caller.
The discrimination doesn’t have to be based on race, it also encompasses gender identity, age, weight and other identity markers. But overall, the legislation is meant to deter people like Amy Cooper from using malintent to call the cops on a person of color and weaponize the police to their advantage.
Might this result in lawsuits being brought to court? How is racist intent determined? Might the law have unintended consequences? And what is its symbolic significance?
Guests:
Jody Armour, professor of law at the University of Southern California; author of “N*gga Theory: Race, Language, Unequal Justice, and the Law” (Los Angeles Review of Books, August 2020) he tweets
Ambrosio Rodriguez, former prosecutor; he is currently a criminal defense attorney at The Rodriguez Law Group in Los Angeles; he led the sex crimes team and was in the homicide unit in the Riverside D.A.’s office ; he tweets at
Triple Play: Gaming Out Game 1 Of The World Series
The World Series matchup between the Los Angeles Dodgers and Tampa Bay Rays is a rare meeting of baseball’s best for the title, and a matchup of organizations with Andrew Friedman’s imprint.
Friedman was the Rays’ director of baseball operations from 2004-05 and then general manager from until he left in October 2014 to become the Dodgers president of baseball operations.
Game 1 is Tuesday night.
Retired first baseman James Loney, a veteran of both organizations, describes the Rays as “feisty.”
“We were always fighting. But we always did feel like we were the better team,” he said Sunday. “I don’t ever feel like we went out there overmatched. We didn’t care who was pitching. We didn’t care what kind of lineup they had. We were bringing that mentality and I think the Rays team this year has that.”
“Both teams are really committed to winning and trying to find any kind of edge they could,” added Loney, who played for the Dodgers from 2006-11 and the Rays from 2013-15. “The Rays are really known for their analytics and getting in there, trying to find different ways to beat hard teams: Is it a bullpen guy that we need to use in maybe an unorthodox situation? And the Dodgers, I felt we kind of started doing that towards the end of my career.”
Today on AirTalk, we’re reconvening the Triple Play to talk all things Dodgers and the World Series. Question or comments? Leave them below or call 866-893-5722.
With files from the Associated Press
Guests:
Jared Diamond, national baseball writer for the Wall Street Journal; his new book is "Swing Kings: The Inside Story of Baseball's Home Run Revolution” (William Morrow, March 2020); he tweets
Nick Roman, host of KPCC’s “All Things Considered”; he tweets
A. Martinez, host of KPCC’s “Take Two”; he tweets
Unemployment AMA: What Can Unemployed Californians Expect Without Another Stimulus, And What Are Your Questions For The EDD Process?
Seven months into the pandemic, large numbers of Californians are still applying for unemployment and attempting to navigate the convoluted process to receive payments.
Out-of-work Californians could not apply for unemployment for a two-week stretch in September and early October after a report found that the state’s Employment Development Department (EDD) was in need of reforms. The system is now back up and running and Californians can apply again, but that’s not to say that they aren’t still experiencing challenges. Additionally, jobless people in the state are no longer receiving the state’s $300/ week assistance, and there has been no federal stimulus plan likely to pass that will alleviate pandemic-related financial pressure for the unemployed.
We’re on today to discuss the latest on unemployment, how the lack of a federal stimulus is likely to affect unemployed Californians and answering any questions you might have about the EDD process. Comment below or give us a call at 866-893-5722.
If you have questions about an unemployment claim, the Center for Workers' Rights has a hotline you can call for assistance at 916-905-1625.
Guests:
Lauren Hepler, economy reporter for CalMatters; she tweets
Daniela Urban, executive director of the Center for Workers' Rights in Sacramento which advocates for workplace justice, she’s also special counsel at Legal Aid at Work, a San Francisco based nonprofit law firm that assists low-income working families throughout California