What CMOs can learn from the fight against Google’s adtech dominance

The digital advertising industry thrives on spectacle, and there’s no greater drama than watching a behemoth like Google go head-to-head with regulators.

As the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ backed by nine states) case against Google wraps up in court over its ad-tech business, at the heart of this litigation lies a concern that Google’s near-monopoly over digital advertising could have lasting repercussions on the future of the internet.

While the legal battle itself is captivating, CMOs should be asking a critical question: What does this mean for us? By following this high-profile case, they can glean invaluable insights, especially if they rely heavily on Google’s tools to manage their digital ad campaigns. The lawsuit, and Google’s response, provides a crucial window into the issues of power, control, and transparency within the ad industry—areas that CMOs should be paying close attention to.

Google’s dominance in digital advertising is no secret, and the company has faced legal troubles before. In 2020, a U.S. court found that the tech giant had created an illegal monopoly with its search engine by paying companies like Apple to make it the default on their browsers, further entrenching its control over search ads. In Europe, Google narrowly avoided a significant $1.6 billion (€1.5 billion) antitrust fine. Now, its ad-tech practices are under the spotlight.

CMOs, take note: If Google wins, its grip on digital advertising could tighten. If it loses, the digital ad landscape may undergo a seismic shift.

Google’s control spans a vast portion of the digital advertising world. The company dominates both the buy and sell sides of the ad-tech market, managing everything from the tools marketers use to bid on ads to the platforms where those ads are displayed. This results in Google setting prices and then reporting on performance through tools like Google Analytics—effectively marking its own homework. For brands using Google’s stack, this creates a significant problem. It becomes difficult to know whether they’re genuinely receiving value for money when the company charging them is also the one reporting the results.

This dominance allows Google to raise prices steadily, and its control over both the ad-buying process and many media assets has further inflated costs. Additionally, incentive rebates offered to agencies for bulk buying only further embed brands within Google’s ecosystem. The outcome? CMOs end up paying more for fewer alternatives, and the convenience of using Google’s platform comes with hefty limitations. It’s not just about the financial cost—it’s about losing control and flexibility in their campaigns.

One of the most frustrating aspects of Google’s dominance is the lack of transparency in their ad delivery and performance reporting, often referred to as the “black box” of ad tech. Tools like Performance Max (PMax) promise optimised ad placement, but offer little insight into where those ads are actually appearing or how bids are placed. This opacity makes it almost impossible to optimise campaigns effectively. Google’s platform provides minimal transparency, and the system often prioritises its own interests.

Despite the impressive tech stack and vast audience data, this dominance stifles innovation. With Google dictating the rules, brands are often left playing within its walled garden, limiting the ability to run meaningful test-and-learn campaigns. CMOs looking to try new branding solutions or creative strategies often hit a brick wall. Google’s heavy emphasis on direct-response tactics leaves little room for creativity or long-term brand-building, while the lack of visibility into ad performance hinders the insights needed to drive innovation.

The lesson for CMOs is clear: Diversify your media mix. Relying too heavily on Google’s ad-tech stack puts your brand at risk. Google’s system is designed to benefit itself, not the brand. While the convenience of its tools is undeniable, they come with rising prices, limited transparency, and fewer opportunities for innovation.

With the DOJ scrutinising Google, it’s more important than ever for marketers to explore alternatives. Google isn’t going anywhere, but CMOs who wish to stay ahead need to think beyond the familiar and easy choices.

Ultimately, this lawsuit is about more than just antitrust law—it’s a wake-up call for marketers. Whether Google wins or loses, this is an opportunity for brands to take back control of their digital advertising strategies.

---

Ori Gold is the CEO of Bench Media.