Google continues to face headwinds as we move into 2025. Besides challenges to its search market share from AI players like ChatGPT, it’s facing ample regulatory scrutiny. The latest shot fired, as you’ve likely heard by now, is the ruling in the DOJ case against Google that it’s indeed a monopoly.
As part of the saga, the DOJ has recommended to the court that Google spin off the Chrome browser – a source of its monopolistic behavior, or so it’s argued. This will be an ongoing legal battle, possibly impacted by an incoming administration. Meanwhile, we’re tapping insights from the Localogyverse.
The latest figure to weigh in is Karla Jo Helms. As Chief Evangelist and Anti-PR Strategist for JOTO PR Disruptors, she brings a marcomm perspective to Google’s situation. How does all the above impact Google’s public image and goodwill? And what will be the impact on its long-term business?
Localogy Insider: Starting basic, what are your initial reactions to the DOJ ruling on Google’s monopolistic status, and the argument that it should spin off Chrome?
Karla Jo Helms: The DOJ’s ruling against Google’s monopolistic practices reflects growing frustration with Big Tech’s dominance. Since COVID, we’ve seen a huge shift in public sentiment—folks are speaking up louder than ever, demanding a level playing field.
The argument to spin off Chrome isn’t surprising—it’s a logical move to reduce Google’s overwhelming influence on the digital ecosystem. Chrome is like the glue holding their search and ad dominance together, which creates a closed loop that stifles competition. Rulings like this don’t happen unless the court of public opinion has spoken, and spoken loudly and for a long time. This ruling feels like a big step toward accountability—bringing some real democratization to the tech world.
Localogy Insider: Do you see it as a fair ruling when looking at what Google has assembled in its search business and its positioning with a dominant browser market share?
Karla Jo Helms: The ruling makes sense when you consider how much control Google has over search and browsers. Their dominance has made them the internet’s gatekeepers. As PR practitioners, we observe society and its behaviors, and it’s clear that people have had enough. Society is saying “no more,” and the court of public opinion has become too loud for lawmakers to ignore. This is forcing action to bring some balance and fairness back to the tech space.
Localogy Insider: Do you see the spinoff eventually happening or what could prevent it? Will a new administration impact the outcome or do you see this pushing forward either way?
Karla Jo Helms: A spin-off could absolutely happen, but let’s not pretend it’ll be easy. Legal battles, appeals, and politics will definitely drag it out. Even a change in administration might shift the DOJ’s priorities, but let’s be honest—frustration with Big Tech isn’t a partisan issue anymore. This case is likely to keep moving forward. That said, Google’s deep integration with its other services is a big hurdle, and untangling it won’t just be a legal challenge—it’ll be a technical and economic mess too. But let’s not forget, that Google was once the ultimate disruptor, an innovator that changed the game. What made them great is what will be needed to make them great again. The cycle of disruption and innovation must continually evolve—it’s the natural order as more people step up to challenge the status quo for the greater good.
Localogy Insider: If Google is forced to do this, there’s some historical evidence that breaking up Google in these ways could be good for competition and consumers (but obviously not for Google). If this goes through who will be the winners and losers?
Karla Jo Helms: If the spin-off happens, it’s clear to me that the biggest winners will be consumers, smaller tech players, and startups eager to break through. Developers might finally get the freedom of a more open browser ecosystem, and the market could see fresh ideas emerge. Google, of course, stands to lose a vital piece of its advertising and search machinery, and advertisers depending on those tools would face new challenges. On top of that, it could spark a domino effect of antitrust cases against other tech giants. That said, Google’s history as a trailblazer and disruptor shows they have what it takes to adapt. Their early success came from rewriting the rules—now it’s time for them to do it again. Change is inevitable as innovation keeps cycling forward, driven by the collective push to make things better for everyone.
Localogy Insider: How do you see this having ripple effects on other aspects of Google’s business and product set, including search? It’s already losing search market share to places like TikTok and ChatGPT. Will its inability to use the browser to favor Google search exacerbate some of those existing headwinds?
Karla Jo Helms: A Chrome spin-off could make Google’s challenges even tougher. Without the ability to integrate Chrome with its search engine, they’d lose a huge competitive edge—opening the door for platforms like TikTok, ChatGPT, and others to grab even more market share. This could force Google to rethink how they innovate and find new ways to keep users engaged. It’s a big shake-up, but it might just push them to evolve in ways they haven’t before.
Localogy Insider: How else does Google use and benefit from Chrome that would be impacted if it spins off the browser?
Karla Jo Helms: Chrome serves as a data goldmine for Google, providing user behavior insights that feed its ad-targeting algorithms. I think a spin-off could sever this data stream, reducing Google’s competitive edge in advertising. Chrome’s role in promoting Google’s products—like prioritizing search results or cross-selling services—would also be curtailed.
Localogy Insider: Stepping back, what do you foresee or predict when it comes to DOJ and FTC scrutiny in the new administration? In the past, there’s been some right-leaning head-butting with big tech… but also, it seems more recently, a bit of an embrace. Combine that with a more corporate-friendly incoming administration and what do you think the next few years looks like for regulatory scrutiny in general?
Karla Jo Helms: With a new administration, we could see regulatory scrutiny shift. Corporate-friendly policies might ease up some of the immediate pressure, but let’s be real—antitrust concerns go beyond party lines. Big Tech isn’t off the hook, especially with public opinion and global regulators pushing harder than ever for accountability.
Localogy Insider: Are there any other impacts or implications of this scenario that you’re anticipating based on where you sit?
Karla Jo Helms: This could set a major precedent, giving regulators around the world the confidence to take similar action. Businesses that lean too heavily on Google’s ecosystem need to brace themselves for disruptions. At the same time, this might actually spark some much-needed innovation as new players step into spaces that Google has dominated for years.
Localogy Insider: What proactive steps should marketers take to prepare for a potential Google breakup and in what ways does Anti-PR help brands remain relevant and competitive in a shifting digital marketplace?
Karla Jo Helms: Marketers need to shake things up and diversify their digital strategies. Putting all your eggs in Google’s basket—whether it’s search, ads, or analytics—is a risky move in a post-breakup world. That’s where Anti-PR comes in. It helps brands build trust-based, multi-channel EARNED narratives that cut through the noise and keep them relevant and resilient in a marketplace that’s getting more fragmented.
Localogy Insider: How does Anti-PR differ from traditional PR in building trust and credibility and what makes trust-based communication essential for brands in the post-Google digital era?
Karla Jo Helms: Anti-PR is all about consistent, trust-based storytelling that builds credibility through third-party validation. Unlike traditional PR, which leans heavily on self-promotion, Anti-PR positions brands as thought leaders by working with media algorithms and staying laser-focused on narrative consistency. In a post-Google era, where uncertainty runs high, trust and transparency are the currency consumers and businesses rely on.
Here’s the thing: It’s a PR world today. We have a 24/7 news cycle globally for a reason – people are glued to the news. There are more channels of news today speaking to super-targeted segments of the business population – not to mention consumer outlets. It’s the network media today – gone are the days of centralized geographically-located media, like NY, and polished, super-controlled vacuous narratives.
It’s the innovators’, disruptors’, SMBs’ and middle-markets’ media today. The more innovations, the more innovative communications are necessary. The court of public opinion is everything, and most businesses haven’t fully grasped the rules of engagement. They’re asking: What are the rules? How do we control our narrative? How do we work with the court of public opinion—not get burned by it—but use it to educate and gain exposure for our brand? These are the questions that matter today.
Knowing these rules and using them as a strategy in any major marketing shake-up gives brands the air cover they need to figure things out. And if their marketing strategies are solid, this approach doesn’t just help them weather the storm—it boosts their success tenfold.
