The real danger is regulatory capture: the experts come from industry and will design regulations to favor the industry. The best remedy would be to break the companies into pieces rather than try to craft rules for how the behemoths should behave. For example, Instragram and Whatsapp can pretty obviously be split from Facebook. At Google, YouTube, mobile, search and even advertising could be split into separate companies.
Maybe have the offending company, company offended, estimated $$ lost as a result of offending company's market control.
Then if you're a govt official you could filter by whoever you're looking into at the moment, and if you click on apple:spotify for instance you'll get aggregated reports/news articles about the two and their competitive battles.
AppNexus - An ad manager? Not sorry, don’t care.
VEVO - Big Music. Not sorry, don’t care.
I’m keeping an open mind about wether Google and Facebook need to be broken up, but if these are the most egregious examples they could come up with, it’s going nowhere.
Haha I'm sorry, are you in charge of breaking up Google and Facebook, or are you just someone commenting on news.ycombinator from a desk job?
Specifically we need to prevent the river of cash Google gets from AdWords being used to run its other businesses at a loss purely to stifle competition. Maybe YouTube can stand on its own, maybe not. Maybe Google Cloud can, maybe not.
Ma Bell literally had sole access or directly owned infrastructure and therefore actually stifled competition. It’s unreasonable to assume someone else could enter the market. I’m not seeing how that’s the case with Google. Their ads business may very well be printing money, but stating they can’t reinvest that to grow their business in other verticals or streams doesn’t make sense.
I assume you’re arguing in good faith, but your post reads less like “Here’s a company actually stifling competition and hurting consumers” and more like “I don’t like tech is so successful. We should break them up.”