In a long-awaited decision, the judge said Google must make some changes to its ad tech business to handle antitrust issues, but did not disclose the measures publicly.
Page A6From§Eachthe noon edition — 2 September 2026
Google dodges ad tech breakup twice, DOJ loses both times
The Department of Justice made two attempts to force Google to break up its ad tech business, each framed as a major push against monopoly power. Both times, the courts ruled for Google—the breakup was not necessary. The story is a sequence: DOJ steps up, the court steps in, Google steps out, intact. The beats land—first, Google's business survives the initial suit, then a second defeat cements the outcome. The official line is that the legal process worked, and the outcome is a clarification, not a setback. But the scoreboard reads: DOJ 0, Google 2. The ad tech engine keeps running, the monopoly stays unbroken, and the court’s decision becomes precedent. The lesson is that, for now, the referee has no teeth, and the game plays on. The question left is whether the next suit will even make it to the field.
“The government lines up to break Google’s ad machine, and Google walks away free—twice. The court says no, DOJ shrugs, and the monopoly keeps humming along. When the referee whistles, but the game never pauses, what’s the point of the stripes?”
“This is just proof the courts understand the value of efficiency and innovation, not so-called monopoly. Google’s ad business is good for consumers, and DOJ’s defeat is really a win for the public. Did I say defeat? I meant clarification. The legal process works—sometimes you don’t get the outcome you want, but that’s not the same as losing. Wait, I probably didn’t say losing.”
The receipts
A judge declined to make Google sell AdX, where publishers pay Google a 20% fee to sell ads in auctions that happen instantly when users load websites.
This page is a back-issue: the story as it ran, receipts as they were. The current edition is at the front.