1. Google’s theory is that, as for every query, Google faces competition from Amazon, Yelp, AA.com, Cars.com and other verticals. The problem is that government kept bringing up searches that only Google / Bing / Duckduckgo and other GSs do.
For example, only general search engines return links to websites with information you might be looking for, e.g., a site explaining how to change the oil on a 1965 Mustang. There’s no way to find that on cars.com.
The second result on Google is the same as the second result when searching posts on Facebook
What is searchable where? If it were on its own (i.e. outside tight integration in an argument about the very dominance of Google shaping not only the availability of alternatives but our concept of search) this claim seems to ignore searcher agency and the context of searches.
Also, why is this the example? What other examples are there for search needs where “only general search engines return links to websites with information you might be looking for”?
That said, it seems worth engaging with…
People are so creative, already come in with so much knowledge, and make choices about what to share or search services to provide in the context of the massive power of Google.