The letter summarizes recent developments regarding investigations into Google's search practices that may warrant revisiting the FTC's previous decision to close its investigation. Specifically, it notes that international regulators like the European Commission have opened antitrust cases against Google and found evidence of search result manipulation. Additionally, new research studies have found that Google's promotion of its own content can degrade search quality and harm consumers by providing less relevant results. As such, the attorneys general encourage the FTC to consider this new information as the issue of fairness in local search continues to evolve.

1. Chairwoman Edith Ramirez
Federal Trade Commission
600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20580
Dear Madam Chairperson:
January 29, 2016
In January 2013, the Federal Trade Commission terminated its investigation ofGoogle's alleged
manipulation of its search results, a practice known as "search bias." Industry participants and
consumer advocates complained that Google manipulated its search results to favor its own
services and products and those of its advertisers, while demoting or excluding rival results that
may be more relevant to consumer searches. The Commission conducted its investigation
alongside several state attorneys general, though attorneys general were not involved in the
settlement discussions.
When consumers perform searches using Google's search engine, Google, using a proprietary
algorithm, searches its index ofthe Internet and assembles and provides ranked websites relevant
to the users search terms- so called "organic" search results. Together with the search results,
Google provides links to its own products and services, such as price results for shopping and
reviews of local businesses. Google was alleged to have manipulated its algorithms in order to
unfairly promote its own proprietary content while, at the same time, demoting competing
websites.
The Commission's investigation found that Google had a dominant position in search and search
advertising, and was manipulating its search page to favor its own results and demote rivals, thus
limiting consumer choices. The Commission, however, closed its investigation finding that
despite the negative impact on competition, the effect of Google's design changes "improve the
quality of its search results." However, consumer advocates, market participants and
international regulators have asserted that this conclusion should be revisited.
Since January 2013, many state attorneys general have continued to monitor this issue with great
interest. General Racine and I write today to direct your attention to some developments that
may be of interest to the Commission on this issue.
Most notably, significant international regulatory action is taking place. Since the conclusion of
the FTC's investigation, regulators around the world have continued to investigate Google. In
fact, the European Commission recently filed formal antitrust charges against Google for

2. allegedly manipulating its search results. The European Competition Commissioner expressed
concerns that users do not necessarily see the most relevant results in response to queries due to
search result manipulation by Google. The European Commission found evidence that Google
was engaging in conduct to divert traffic from competing services. The European Commission
relied on empirical studies and evidence to conclude that Google is harming consumers and the
competitive process.
Similarly, the Competition Commission of India ("CCI") has issued its own complaint against
Google. The CCI found Google liable for promoting its own proprietary content over content
that would be most relevant to the user and ofbiasing search results for sponsored links. Other
jurisdictions, including Canada and Brazil, maintain active investigations.
In addition to the new regulatory actions, last year, researchers at the Columbia Law School,
Harvard Business School and Yelp's Science Data Team published a research paper entitled
"Does Google Content Degrade Google Search? Experimental Evidence," which reexamined
whether Google has been skewing search results and the impact this practice has on consumers.
The authors of the study, which included former FTC ChiefTechnologist Tim Wu and Harvard
Professor Michael Luca, found that search bias by Google does, in fact, harm consumers.
According to the study, users were significantly less likely to actually click through the search
results in an organic search when the results were manipulated by Google. According to the
study's authors:
The easy and widely disseminated argument that Google's
universal search always serves users and merchants is
demonstrably false. In the largest category of search (local intent-
based), Google appears to be strategically deploying universal
search in a way that degrades the product so as to slow and exclude
challengers to its dominant search paradigm.
See http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract id=2667143. The paper has been criticized
by Google because it was underwritten by Yelp, a local search engine company that provides
consumer generated reviews of businesses and services. However, we believe additional
investigation may confirm what this research shows, which is that search manipulation by
Google has the following negative impacts on consumers: a) users may abandon their searches if
they do not find what they are looking for, leading to unconsummated online and offline
transactions; b) users take longer to find the information they need, suffering greater search costs
in the process and making less informed decisions; and c) users patronize businesses or service
providers that may not have been their first choice, thus impacting businesses' ability to compete
for customers.
As attorneys general, we are always pleased to work with the FTC to protect consumers, to
ensure fair competition and to work cooperatively to address issues that impact our
economy. We write today to thank you for your attention to so many issues facing American
consumers. The issue of local search result fairness is an evolving issue in a fast paced digital
economy. We encourage the Commission to consider new information and developments that
have become available both domestically and internationally since closing its Google

3. investigation. Upon doing so, the Commission may determine that its investigation should be
revisited. Ofcourse, we thank you for your consideration ofthis letter and this significant
consumer Issue.
Sean eyes
Attorney General for the State ofUtah
Karl Racine
Attorney General for the District of Columbia