Google has proposed adjustments to its search results in response to scrutiny from the European Union regarding antitrust fine, as reported by Reuters.

This proposal comes ahead of a meeting in Brussels scheduled for July 7-8, where Google will present its plans to the European Commission and competitors.

The company, part of Alphabet, is facing allegations under the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) for allegedly favoring its services, such as Google Shopping and Google Flights, over those of competitors.

The DMA aims to limit the dominance of major tech companies and encourage fair competition in the market.

Among the proposed changes is a feature called “Option B.”

This includes a vertical search service (VSS) box that provides links to specialized search engines and a separate box with free links to suppliers like hotels, airlines, and restaurants.

Google has indicated that it has made several changes to its products to align with DMA requirements.

However, the company has expressed concerns about how these regulations might affect user experience in Europe.

.source-ref{font-size:0.85em;color:#666;display:block;margin-top:1em;}a.ask-tia-citation-link:hover{color:#11628d !important;background:#e9f6f5 !important;border-color:#11628d !important;text-decoration:none !important;}@media only screen and (min-width:768px){a.ask-tia-citation-link{font-size:11px !important;}}

🔗 Source: Reuters

🧠 Food for thought

1️⃣ EU’s decade-long antitrust campaign against Google signals a distinct regulatory philosophy

The current case represents just the latest chapter in a consistent European approach to tech regulation that has repeatedly targeted Google since 2010.

The EU has already imposed multiple significant fines on Google, including €2.42 billion in 2017 for favoring its comparison shopping service and €1.49 billion in 2019 for abusive practices in online advertising1.

These actions highlight a fundamental philosophical difference between European and American regulators, with the EU demonstrating greater willingness to intervene in digital markets while U.S. authorities have historically been more hesitant to pursue similar cases2.

The Digital Markets Act (DMA) represents an evolution of this approach, shifting from case-by-case enforcement to establishing clear rules that specifically target “gatekeeper” platforms like Google, reflecting the EU’s growing confidence in its regulatory strategy.

This regulatory divergence creates a challenging compliance landscape for global tech companies, who must increasingly develop region-specific products and practices, a trend that shows no signs of abating as the EU continues to lead global tech regulation.

2️⃣ Google’s proposed search changes follow a familiar pattern of reactive compliance

Google’s latest proposals mirror a historical pattern seen with other tech giants making reluctant concessions under regulatory pressure.

This response echoes Microsoft’s implementation of a “browser choice screen” in the EU following its antitrust case in the early 2000s—a remedy that came only after significant regulatory intervention3.

Google’s specific proposals, such as creating specialized boxes at the top of search results with links to competitors, represent a tactical attempt to preserve its core business model while making minimal changes to satisfy regulators4.

The company has consistently maintained that its practices benefit consumers while making just enough adjustments to avoid penalties, a strategy reflected in its statement that it has made “hundreds of alterations” while expressing “genuine concern” about the DMA’s consequences.

This approach highlights the persistent tension between regulatory compliance and protecting market position that characterizes how dominant tech platforms respond to antitrust pressure.

3️⃣ The evolving economics of default search positioning drives regulatory focus

Google’s dominance in search is significantly reinforced by default positioning, a factor increasingly targeted by regulators.

Recent research demonstrates that many users stick with Google primarily due to habit and default settings rather than superior quality, with studies showing that exposure to alternatives can significantly shift user preferences56.

Google maintains its position partly through massive payments to device manufacturers and browsers, paying approximately $20 billion annually to Apple alone to remain the default search engine on iOS devices, an arrangement that’s now under scrutiny in multiple jurisdictions7.

The EU’s focus on search result presentation directly addresses these default advantages, with remedies specifically designed to increase visibility of competing services in areas where Google has historically promoted its own offerings4.

These regulatory interventions reflect growing recognition that in digital markets, prominence and defaults can be more powerful competitive advantages than traditional measures like price or quality, fundamentally changing how competition authorities approach dominance in the digital economy.

……