Policy

The detente between Microsoft and Google is over. Here's why Microsoft is fighting again.

It's a PR battle that Brad Smith is determined to win.

The detente between Microsoft and Google is over. Here's why Microsoft is fighting again.

Smith testified before the House Judiciary Committee last week.

Photo: Kent Nishimura/Getty Images

After spending several years fighting its rivals behind the scenes in Washington, Microsoft is ready to go public again.

Under former CEO Steve Ballmer, Microsoft was an unabashed fighter, regularly using the power of regulation and loud PR to sting its rivals — mainly, Google — and inflate its own importance. That changed under CEO Satya Nadella, who has encouraged the company to stay heads-down developing products while continuing closed-door conversations with regulators in the U.S. and worldwide, according to current and former executives from both companies.

But Brad Smith's testimony before Congress last week, and the company's public scrapes with Google, appear to mark an end to the cautious detente Microsoft and Google reached in 2016, the executives said.

"It's about time," said Stefan Weitz, the former Microsoft executive who was instrumental in Microsoft's highest-profile campaigns against Google. "I felt like they got away from this for the last several years. And it's kind of fun to see them throwing their weight and significant clout behind an issue."

This time around, Microsoft is bashing Google over its control over the news business, a hot-button issue that came to a head in Australia earlier this month and has caught the attention of policymakers in the U.S. Microsoft came out publicly in support of Australia's controversial law that allows news publishers to negotiate with Google and Facebook over sharing content, and Smith testified in support of similar legislation before the House Judiciary Committee.

It's a win-win for Microsoft, said Frank Shaw, Microsoft's longtime spokesman and a key player in the "Scroogled" years.

"Every once in a while, you get what you think about as these flash moments that change the environment, where people see things differently," Shaw told Protocol. "Google created its own flash moment in Australia ... 'Journalism is in trouble and Google is responsible, in part.'"

"Of course we compete with Google; we have a search engine," Shaw said. "We saw [speaking out] as an opportunity to align our business interests and something we also care about."

Google declined to comment beyond last week's blog post, in which Google's senior vice president of global affairs Kent Walker called Microsoft's interest in the news issue "self-serving" and claimed Microsoft is trying to deflect from its role in the SolarWinds hack.

Of course, it's not all about Bing, which is hardly central to Microsoft's business model. Microsoft and Google compete across a wide variety of areas — search, office products, apps, internet browsers and, perhaps most importantly, cloud.

But the news fight could be best understood as the most public prong of Microsoft's broader campaign to paint itself as the most responsible large tech company, riding the wave of the post-2016 techlash and unprecedented antitrust scrutiny against its competitors with the intention of coming out on top. Just as Smith is advocating for a law that would allow news organizations to negotiate with Google and Facebook, he's also calling for Section 230 reform. And Microsoft is quietly assisting the DOJ and states in their antitrust suits against Google. In other words, Microsoft is increasingly going for all of Google's Achilles' heels. "Microsoft has done a terrific job in recent years of holding itself out as and acting as a more responsible tech company," said Alan Davidson, Google's former top policy executive who opened and headed its D.C. office.

Microsoft's policy team has been aggressively positioning Smith as an ethical tech leader, in stark contrast to Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos. And it seems to be working, as progressives and lawmakers welcome Smith's firepower with open arms. Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a leading progressive in Congress, kicked off last week's hearing by thanking Smith for his involvement in the issue.

"I don't know why Smith is testifying except that Microsoft is big and powerful," tweeted Matt Stoller, a leading progressive antitrust scholar and director of research at the anti-monopoly American Economic Liberties Project. "But ok, I'm fine with it."

"I wish I had this support [from progressives] back when I was running these campaigns," Weitz said.

The irony isn't lost on those who have been involved in the decades-long policy battle: The government's 1990s antitrust case against Microsoft set the stage for the cases pending against Google and Facebook now.

In the early 2000s, when Microsoft and Google were first beginning to spar, the dynamic was completely different. Google was the upstart disruptor and Microsoft was a powerful institution protecting its turf. But Google is no longer an upstart, and its posture has changed accordingly. "Google's primary posture in business is disruptive," said Adam Kovacevich, Google's former policy head, "and its primary posture in politics is defensive."

As Google continued to grow, Microsoft, which was known for picking fights with rivals, battened down the hatches. Microsoft funded an anti-Google trade group in Europe and FairSearch, a consortium of search groups that raised antitrust concerns with Google in the U.S. It spoke to regulators around the world about Google's position in search and worked relentlessly behind the scenes to agitate against Google's products, at one point helping to blow up a proposed deal between Yahoo and Google.

Google often hit back. In 2011, as Microsoft launched a showcase to promote Bing and insult Google's "spammy" search results, Google launched one of its most memorable counter-attacks: It publicized evidence that showed Bing was scraping Google's search results.

Weitz said he was the one who invited Matt Cutts, Google's search spam prevention head, to a Microsoft conference about Bing. "We put together this event to showcase the future of search," he said. "And Matt runs in with a laptop and is showing the journalists evidence that we copied their search results."

The rivalry only intensified as Microsoft launched its legendary "Scroogled" ad campaign, hitting Google over its privacy policies. At one point, Microsoft devoted a section of its online store to "Scroogled" merchandise, including a mug that read, "Keep calm while we steal your data."

The companies fought heated patent and antitrust battles, in court and in policymakers' offices — until they agreed to withdraw their regulatory complaints against one another in 2016.

Now, the two companies are positioning themselves for another public war, just as Google faces unprecedented levels of pressure from governments around the world and Microsoft seeks to stay relevant.

"On some level, you could say, 'Why should anybody care about two big companies fighting it out? They both have a lot of resources and armies of lobbyists. How much does it really matter if they're fighting this thing out?'" Davidson said.

But he said it's ultimately a fraught gamble. "I think we should care when consumers are caught in the crossfire," he said. "There's the saying: 'When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.' We should be careful not to let policy decisions be driven by intramural fighting between big companies."

Workplace

Netflix’s layoffs reveal a larger diversity challenge in tech

Netflix just laid off 150 full-time employees and a number of agency contractors. Many of them were the company’s most marginalized employees.

It quickly became clear that many of the laid-off contractors possessed marginalized identities.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

After Netflix’s first round of layoffs, there was a brief period of relief for the contractors who ran Netflix’s audience-oriented social media channels, like Strong Black Lead, Most and Con Todo. But the calm didn’t last.

Last week, Netflix laid off 150 full-time employees and a number of agency contractors. The customary #opentowork posts flooded LinkedIn, many coming from impacted members of Netflix’s talent and recruiting teams. A number of laid-off social media contractors also took to Twitter to share the news. It quickly became clear that similar to the layoffs at Tudum, Netflix’s entertainment site, many of the affected contractors possessed marginalized identities. The channels they ran focused on Black, LGBTQ+, Latinx and Asian audiences, among others.

Keep Reading Show less
Lizzy Lawrence

Lizzy Lawrence ( @LizzyLaw_) is a reporter at Protocol, covering tools and productivity in the workplace. She's a recent graduate of the University of Michigan, where she studied sociology and international studies. She served as editor in chief of The Michigan Daily, her school's independent newspaper. She's based in D.C., and can be reached at llawrence@protocol.com.

Sponsored Content

Why the digital transformation of industries is creating a more sustainable future

Qualcomm’s chief sustainability officer Angela Baker on how companies can view going “digital” as a way not only toward growth, as laid out in a recent report, but also toward establishing and meeting environmental, social and governance goals.

Three letters dominate business practice at present: ESG, or environmental, social and governance goals. The number of mentions of the environment in financial earnings has doubled in the last five years, according to GlobalData: 600,000 companies mentioned the term in their annual or quarterly results last year.

But meeting those ESG goals can be a challenge — one that businesses can’t and shouldn’t take lightly. Ahead of an exclusive fireside chat at Davos, Angela Baker, chief sustainability officer at Qualcomm, sat down with Protocol to speak about how best to achieve those targets and how Qualcomm thinks about its own sustainability strategy, net zero commitment, other ESG targets and more.

Keep Reading Show less
Chris Stokel-Walker

Chris Stokel-Walker is a freelance technology and culture journalist and author of "YouTubers: How YouTube Shook Up TV and Created a New Generation of Stars." His work has been published in The New York Times, The Guardian and Wired.

Fintech

Crypto doesn’t have to be red or blue

Sens. Cynthia Lummis and Kirsten Gillibrand are backing bipartisan legislation that establishes regulatory clarity for cryptocurrencies. This is the right way to approach a foundational technology.

"Crypto doesn’t neatly fall along party lines because, as a foundational technology, it is — or should be — inherently nonpartisan," says Diogo Mónica, co-founder and president of Anchorage Digital.

Photo: Anchorage Digital

Diogo Mónica is president and co-founder of Anchorage Digital.

When I moved from Portugal to the United States to work at Square, it was hard to wrap my head around the two-party system that dominates American politics. As I saw at home, democracies, by their very nature, can be messy. But as an outsider looking in, I can’t help but worry that the ever-widening gap between America’s two major parties looms over crypto’s future.

Keep Reading Show less
Diogo Mónica
Diogo Mónica is the co-founder and president of Anchorage Digital, the premier digital asset platform for institutions. He holds a Ph.D. in computer science from the Technical University of Lisbon, and has worked in software security for over 15 years. As an early employee at Square, he helped build security architecture that now moves $100 billion annually. At Docker, he helped secure core infrastructure used in global banks, governments and the three largest cloud providers.
Fintech

What downturn? A16z raises $4.5 billion for latest crypto fund

The new fund is more than double the $2.2 billion fund the VC firm raised just last June.

A16z general partner Arianna Simpson said that despite the precipitous drop in crypto prices in recent months, the firm is looking to stay active in the market and isn’t worried about short-term price changes.

Photo: Andreessen Horowitz

Andreessen Horowitz has raised $4.5 billion for two crypto venture funds. They’re the industry’s largest ever and represent an outsized bet on the future of Web3 startups, even with the industry in the midst of a steep market downturn.

The pool of money is technically two separate funds: a $1.5 billion fund for seed deals and a $3 billion fund for broader venture deals. That’s more than other megafunds recently raised by competitors such as Paradigm and Haun Ventures.

Keep Reading Show less
Tomio Geron

Tomio Geron ( @tomiogeron) is a San Francisco-based reporter covering fintech. He was previously a reporter and editor at The Wall Street Journal, covering venture capital and startups. Before that, he worked as a staff writer at Forbes, covering social media and venture capital, and also edited the Midas List of top tech investors. He has also worked at newspapers covering crime, courts, health and other topics. He can be reached at tgeron@protocol.com or tgeron@protonmail.com.

Entertainment

How Amazon built its kid-focused Glow video calling projector

Robots, laser pointers, talking stuffies: Amazon’s devices team went through many iterations while developing its very first interactive projection device.

The Amazon Glow is the first interactive projection device sold by Amazon, and it could be a stepping stone for the company to use the technology in other areas.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Cats love chasing laser pointers. So why not have kids do the same?

When a small team within Amazon’s devices group began exploring the idea of a kid-focused video calling device nearly five years ago, they toyed with a lot of far-out ideas, a laser pointer controlled by an adult calling from afar being one of them. The suggestion was quickly dismissed over eye safety concerns, but it did lead the team down a path exploring projection technologies.

Keep Reading Show less
Janko Roettgers

Janko Roettgers (@jank0) is a senior reporter at Protocol, reporting on the shifting power dynamics between tech, media, and entertainment, including the impact of new technologies. Previously, Janko was Variety's first-ever technology writer in San Francisco, where he covered big tech and emerging technologies. He has reported for Gigaom, Frankfurter Rundschau, Berliner Zeitung, and ORF, among others. He has written three books on consumer cord-cutting and online music and co-edited an anthology on internet subcultures. He lives with his family in Oakland.

Latest Stories
Bulletins