Google's quest for public pity after DOJ's Search monopoly proposal backfires spectacularly

Google recently embarked on a public sympathy campaign on X, a social media platform not unlike the one they’re currently battling the Department of Justice (DOJ) over. Apparently, the DOJ’s antitrust lawsuit challenging Google’s dominance in search has left the tech giant feeling a tad… bruised. Their strategy? A flurry of impassioned posts highlighting the potential “harm” the DOJ’s actions could inflict on, wait for it… small businesses. Yes, you read that right. The same small businesses Google’s recent HCU (Helpful Content Update) updates have been accused of leaving in smoldering ruins.

The DOJ has been breathing down Google’s neck, waving antitrust laws threatening to dismantle what it calls the company’s “illegal monopoly.” But instead of rousing cheers of solidarity, Google’s posts ignited a blaze of sardonic replies and bitter commentary from none other than small businesses — many of whom claim to have been steamrolled by Google’s own practices.

In the first post, Google claims the DOJ missed an opportunity to address the core issue of search distribution agreements in its antitrust case. Instead, the company argues, the DOJ has adopted a “radical interventionist agenda” that risks not only harming American consumers and businesses but also undermining the country’s global technological leadership.

Google’s second post came in the form of a dramatic post lamenting the DOJ’s extreme approach. According to the tech giant, the DOJ’s plan would “hurt American consumers, developers, and small businesses” while threatening America’s “global economic and technological leadership.” Oh, and let’s not forget, this “would break a range of Google products — even beyond Search — that people love.”

The internet, however, was having none of it.

“No one has hurt small businesses and caused incidental job loss at scale more than you in the past year,” fired back one user. Another quipped, “This is rich considering the state of Google search results.” And yet another cut straight to the chase: “What exactly do you want from us? Pity? After you destroyed thousands of people’s small businesses?”

If Google hoped to gather sympathy from small business owners, it clearly didn’t anticipate the collective memory of those who were sidelined by the HCU fiasco. As one enraged respondent put it: “You wiped out the income of thousands. I spent 14 years of my life building a single website, you decimated it over 3 to 4 updates. Labelled it as unhelpful and spam. This has done massive damage to my family.”

Not content with the thrashing it received, Google doubled down hours later. This time, it painted a dystopian picture of government overreach. Imagine this, folks: TWO choice screens on a Pixel phone, both designed by a DOJ-appointed “Technical Committee.” “Extreme proposal,” cried Google.

But if the second post was a spark, the third was gasoline.

“You abused your power and scraped our private data for profit,” one user shot back. “Then you unleashed flawed algorithms that wiped out small publishers in favor of sites like Forbes. You brought this on yourselves.”

Another user broke it down with biting clarity: “Actions have consequences. You illegally monopolized search. You knew the rules. The Sherman Antitrust Act is 135 years old. Just like criminals get put in jail, monopolists get put under administration. Stop whining.”

Four posts within hours? Google was clearly on a roll — or more accurately, in a spiral. The fourth post reiforced its earlier arguments, warning that the DOJ’s actions would lead to “unprecedented government overreach.” By this point, the replies were coming in thick, fast, and unrelentingly brutal.

“Cue the world’s tiniest violin,” mocked one user. “You destroyed small publishers, and now DOJ is taking the right step to catch you,” chimed another.

A particularly savage commentator summed it up: “Few years ago, I would’ve gone to bat for Google. It was hard being a small publisher. Competing against giant websites, monster budgets, stolen content etc. But there was always a chance, always something to fight. Now, nothing. No chance. No hope. Hope the DOJ rips ‘em to shreds lol.”

Let’s pause here to appreciate the irony. Google, the same company whose algorithm updates have been described as a slow-motion demolition derby for small businesses, is now waving the small-business flag as its shield against the DOJ. It’s as if a wrecking ball suddenly started campaigning for the preservation of heritage buildings.

“You want people to care when you have cared so little about other people,” one reply aptly noted. Another respondent didn’t mince words: “At this point, nothing is more ‘extreme’ than your HCU and further updates that destroyed small businesses overnight. Can’t wait till you get it.”

There’s a grim poetic justice in this saga. The DOJ is stepping in to enforce antitrust laws because of what it calls Google’s “illegal monopoly.” Yet, the company’s recent struggles to win public support underscore how far it has alienated the very ecosystem it claims to protect.

“Few years ago, this thread would have been universally in your favor,” one reply lamented. “Support from every corner of the Internet. You betrayed those people. You ruined years of hard work, missed birthdays, working holidays. Your turn to feel powerless as a bigger, meaner third party wipes out all you’ve worked to achieve.”

As the DOJ sharpens its knives, Google might want to reflect on a simple truth: when you burn bridges, don’t be surprised when no one’s willing to cross back to your side. For now, though, the tech giant seems content to play the victim — an act that, judging by X’s replies, has failed to impress.

Perhaps one user said it best: “Karma is a bitch, I know, but you gotta accept it.” This was inevitable the moment Google decided to prefer those bucks over quality.