Thoughts on the European Commission’s Preliminary Finding of Self-preferencing by Google
We applaud the Commission’s preliminary finding of Google’s non-compliance with Digital Markets Act Article 6(5) in the Hotels, Flights, and Shopping verticals.
Yesterday‘s news that the European Commission sent a preliminary finding of non-compliance with Article 6(5) has the potential to radically alter search results in Europe for the better, even beyond the specific verticals addressed by the announcement itself. We enthusiastically applaud this news.
From the press release (bold is original):
[F]ollowing the Commission's investigation and feedback from interested third parties during several workshops, the Commission takes the preliminary view that Alphabet self-preferences its own services over those of third parties, thereby failing to comply with the DMA. In particular:
- Alphabet treats its own services, such as shopping, hotel booking, transport, or financial and sports results, more favourably in Google Search results than similar services offered by third parties.
- More specifically, Alphabet gives its own services more prominent treatment compared to others by displaying them at the top of Google Search results or on dedicated spaces, with enhanced visual formats and filtering mechanisms.
We concur with the Commission’s preliminary findings as they relate to the Hotel vertical specifically, as well as the other local verticals we’ve studied in Europe (restaurants and home services).
The Commission’s specific reference to “enhanced visual formats and filtering mechanisms” is particularly noteworthy. We see this as a key way which Google preferences its own Business Profiles — even when the third party Places sites carousel appears above Business Profiles.
Far from “hurting European businesses,” we assert this finding of non-compliance has the potential to drive more traffic straight to local businesses (and directories and publishers)—traffic which Business Profiles intermediate for so many local searches. Google’s tests thus far have been limited.
At today’s Thought Leaders 4 Competition event in Brussels, DG Comp Head of Unit Thomas Kramler indicated that the Commission seeks to give Google guardrails for compliance with Article 6(5), as opposed to specific product design guidance: an approach we also applaud.
Kramler also stated the Commission’s desire to see the guardrails apply beyond just the three verticals currently under investigation: specifically that the Commission is trying to “avoid whackamole” investigations in subsequent verticals.
This could mean significant changes to SERP interfaces across Google Search in the near future.
Comment on a new Google local search test
Google may have had some early indication of these findings. In certain local verticals, they’ve introduced a new map-oriented module featuring a carousel of Google Business Profiles above or below a carousel of Aggregators (the Places sites module). Both carousels are placed on a blue background, which is a new treatment in and of itself.
The closer integration with the Places sites module with the map interface may drive more clicks but still doesn’t provide equal treatment to third party profiles.
Google Business Profiles invariably feature gold star ratings and photos (highly impactful to consumer engagement), whereas Places sites only link to category pages, sometimes without photos and at least in our anecdotal experience while traveling in Germany and Belgium this week, always without ratings.
It seems to us this would still under the umbrella of “favourable treatment” for Google’s own products.