A former advertising technology executive at News Corp testified that the company considered moving away from Google’s advertising products in 2017 but ultimately decided against it due to potential revenue losses of at least $9 million. The testimony came during the second day of the latest antitrust trial exploring Google’s absolute dominance of the internet.

The New York Post reports that during the second day of the Justice Department’s antitrust case against Google, Stephanie Layser, a former advertising technology executive at News Corp, took the stand to shed light on the tech giant’s dominance in the digital advertising market. Layser, who worked at News Corp from 2017 to 2022, revealed that despite Google’s advertising tools being “clunky and slow” and the company’s reluctance to add new features, News Corp felt compelled to continue using their services due to Google’s market control.

Layser’s testimony highlighted the extent of Google’s stranglehold on the digital advertising industry, with the former executive stating, “I felt like they were holding us hostage.” She explained that Google’s ad exchange was essentially the only service publishers used for ad deals, leaving companies like News Corp with few alternatives.

According to court documents, News Corp earned $83.3 million in ads sold through digital ad tech tools in 2016, with the majority of deals utilizing Google’s ad exchange and generating $18.4 million in revenue from advertisers active on the platform. When exploring the possibility of leaving Google’s ecosystem, News Corp estimated that roughly half of the $18.4 million came from advertisers exclusive to Google’s network, meaning the news giant would lose more than $9 million if they discontinued using Google’s services.

The reliance on Google’s tools only increased over time, with Layser revealing that between 70 percent and 80 percent of News Corp’s ad deals were conducted through Google’s tools by the end of her tenure in 2022. This testimony underscores the challenge faced by publishers and advertisers who wish to diversify their advertising strategies away from Google’s ecosystem.

The Justice Department’s case against Google alleges that the tech giant maintains a “trifecta of monopolies” through its control of ad tools used by both publishers and advertisers, as well as the ad exchange that connects them. The DOJ claims that Google leverages this dominance to capture up to 35 cents of every dollar flowing through its systems.

Google’s defense team, led by Kamala Harris adviser Karen Dunn, argues that the DOJ’s case is based on a flawed understanding of the digital ad market and that government intervention could cause significant harm to businesses relying on Google’s services.

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema is presiding over the case, which is expected to last about four weeks. The Justice Department is seeking a breakup of Google’s ad technology empire, including the divestment of its Ad Manager tool, in an effort to promote competition and fairness in the digital advertising market.