CAPTCHAFORUM
Administrator
Antitrust proceedings against Google and Facebook in the United States have received additional fuel. The ad deal between the companies reduced competition in the online ad market, according to a lawsuit filed by Texas and nine other states in December. This is reported by The New York Times with reference to the documents he received on the claim.
The publication found that the deal, codenamed "Jedi Blue," gave Facebook an edge in the Header Bidding process, where sites can bid on ad slots across multiple exchanges in exchange for supporting Google's Open Bidding technology used to sell those ads.
As a result, Facebook had more time to bid and settle directly with the sites on which the ads were placed. The company also received help from Google in understanding the ad audience.
According to the lawsuit, as part of the agreement, Facebook pledged to bid on at least 90% of ad auctions if it can identify users, and promised a minimum spending level of up to $ 500 million per year. He also asked Google to avoid using bidding information to bias advertising auctions in its favor.
Google's other ad partners did not receive such favorable terms, according to an NYT survey.
The lawsuit accuses Google of guaranteeing a certain amount of ad winnings for Facebook and putting competitors at a disadvantage.
Google and Facebook have already denied accusations that the deal between them was anti-competitive.
A Facebook spokesman said that agreements of this kind actually help increase competition in ad auctions, and claims to the contrary are unfounded.
As for Google, the company said on its blog that the lawsuit misrepresents this deal, as well as other aspects of its advertising business.
The publication found that the deal, codenamed "Jedi Blue," gave Facebook an edge in the Header Bidding process, where sites can bid on ad slots across multiple exchanges in exchange for supporting Google's Open Bidding technology used to sell those ads.
As a result, Facebook had more time to bid and settle directly with the sites on which the ads were placed. The company also received help from Google in understanding the ad audience.
According to the lawsuit, as part of the agreement, Facebook pledged to bid on at least 90% of ad auctions if it can identify users, and promised a minimum spending level of up to $ 500 million per year. He also asked Google to avoid using bidding information to bias advertising auctions in its favor.
Google's other ad partners did not receive such favorable terms, according to an NYT survey.
The lawsuit accuses Google of guaranteeing a certain amount of ad winnings for Facebook and putting competitors at a disadvantage.
Google and Facebook have already denied accusations that the deal between them was anti-competitive.
A Facebook spokesman said that agreements of this kind actually help increase competition in ad auctions, and claims to the contrary are unfounded.
As for Google, the company said on its blog that the lawsuit misrepresents this deal, as well as other aspects of its advertising business.