aim

What Brussels has launched today is not just another technical note on how Google works, but a movement that points directly to the way in which it decides what we see when we search for information. An internal policy designed to combat spam has ended up at the center of a new European file because, according to the Commissionyou could be relegating content from legitimate media and publishers. An issue that, for the Commission, deserves to be thoroughly reviewed to determine if its application is having undesired effects. We are facing an action that opens an official procedure in which the Commission will evaluate whether Google is complying with the obligations of the DMA in relation to the treatment that publishers receive in its search engine. Brussels wants to check whether the access and positioning conditions comply with the equity criteria provided for services designated as gatekeeper. This initial phase does not involve attributing a violation, but it does activate a detailed process that will determine how the regulations are actually being applied. Politics under suspicion. Google includes ‘reputation abuse policy’ in its Search spam rules and presents it as a tool to address practices aimed at manipulating ranking in results when sites include content from commercial partners. From a technical perspective, the motivation makes sense: the ecosystem is full of practices that try to exploit gaps to obtain a better position in the results. The Commission’s question is whether this policy is affecting publications that use commercial collaborations within a legitimate editorial framework. For media outlets, these deals are an important source of revenue, and their demotion in Google Search can have real effects on audiences. Brussels wants to know to what extent its application may be penalizing actors who are not seeking to manipulate anything. The analysis will revolve around that fine line. DMA in action. The Digital Markets Law establishes its own regime for the platforms considered gatekeepersthe large platforms that act as a gateway between companies and users in the digital environment. These services are required to ensure that their internal rules are understandable, justified and reviewable by the Commission, even before there is demonstrated harm. The investigation is framed in that model: Brussels wants to validate that the policy applied by Google complies with the reinforced obligations that accompany that status. Blow to the revenue model. The executive vice president for a Clean, Fair and Competitive Transition, Teresa Ribera, was explicit about the point that most worries Brussels: “We are concerned that Google’s policies do not allow news publishers to be treated in a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory manner in search results.” He also stressed that the loss of income comes “at a difficult time for the sector,” which makes this investigation more than just a technical review. A long and complicated relationship. Brussels has maintained constant scrutiny over Google for years, visible in sanctions like the 2,950 million euros imposed in September 2025 for practices in its advertising business, or in the 2017 Google Shopping fine, ratified by the European Court of Justice in 2024. This new investigation does not start from scratch: it adds to a history that reflects how the Commission has tightened its surveillance as the company’s activity has covered more sectors. Pressure from Washington. The case also comes at a time when some of the loudest criticism of the European digital framework comes from the United States. Donald Trump has denounced that measures like the DMA hurt American companies and has warned of possible additional tariffs if they persist. Without being part of the file, these statements illustrate the political context in which Google’s policy is examined and show how European regulation coexists with growing commercial sensitivity on the other side of the Atlantic. The possible outcomes. From now on, Brussels will examine documentation, ask Alphabet for clarification and evaluate whether the policy fits into the DMA’s obligations. If it detects non-compliance, it will inform the company of its conclusions and the measures it considers necessary to correct them. The procedure can be closed without sanctions, with internal adjustments by Google or with the imposition of formal obligations and, ultimately, fines. The Commission plans to complete the analysis within a period of up to twelve months. Images | sarah b | 1981 Digital In Xataka | Apple accepts crumbs in China: the 15% that shows who has the power