Business Insider sues Google over alleged manipulation of digital ad markets

New Delhi: Business Insider has filed a complaint in the New York District Courts accusing Google of unlawfully monopolising digital advertising markets and suppressing publisher revenues.

On September 8, Insider, the publisher of Business Insider, lodged the 89-page lawsuit against Google and its parent company Alphabet. According to the report, the publisher alleges that Google engaged in a long-running scheme to dominate advertising technology and deprive publishers of fair revenue.

The action seeks damages and injunctive relief intended to restore competition in what are described as monopolised markets and to safeguard funding for independent journalism.

Google’s control of two key advertising products is central to the case: its publisher ad server, DoubleClick for Publishers (DFP), and its ad exchange, DoubleClick Ad Exchange (AdX). According to the report, the company linked these products in a way that forced publishers to use DFP in order to access AdX, where many advertisers are concentrated. 

With DFP covering more than 90% of the publisher ad server market and AdX managing 60 to 70% of exchange-based ad sales, the complaint says this arrangement left publishers with little choice, reduced competition, and allowed Google to collect monopoly profits.

The filing outlines how Google allegedly manipulated real-time bidding to its advantage. According to the report, Google introduced a system after acquiring DoubleClick in 2008 that allowed AdX to bid dynamically in real time, while rival exchanges could only submit static bids based on historical averages. 

This enabled AdX to secure impressions at lower prices. The complaint further alleges that Google used its publisher ad server to give AdX a competitive advantage through a practice described as Last Look, whereby AdX was informed of the winning external bid before finalising the auction, allowing it to win impressions by matching or slightly exceeding the amount. 

In 2019, Google replaced this with a unified auction but introduced a rule known as Minimum Bid to Win, under which bidders were informed of the second-highest bid, enabling Google’s algorithms to adjust future bids and maintain an advantage similar to the earlier system.

The report adds that other practices were also employed to reinforce Google’s dominance and distort pricing in digital advertising.

The case follows a series of regulatory findings against Google’s advertising operations worldwide. In April 2025, a federal court in Virginia concluded that the company had engaged in anticompetitive conduct to maintain monopoly power in the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets.

Earlier this month, the European Commission fined Google nearly €3 billion and ordered structural remedies to address conflicts of interest in advertising technology. Competition regulators in Australia and the United Kingdom have also highlighted concerns over Google’s position in digital advertising.

According to the report, Business Insider contends that Google’s conduct has cost publishers hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue, with direct implications for funding journalism. The lawsuit, filed under the Sherman Act, alleges monopolisation, attempted monopolisation and unlawful tying, in addition to claims of fraud and unjust enrichment.

If upheld, the case could add momentum to ongoing regulatory and legal actions targeting Google’s role in advertising technology and alter the structure of the digital advertising market.