What happens if Google is forced to divest Chrome or Android? How might Google’s potential breakup reshape digital advertising? Nine industry leaders share insights on the DOJ’s proposed remedies and what they could mean for digital advertising and ad tech.
With two major antitrust cases in motion, the DOJ has doubled down on its mission to dismantle Google’s dominance in digital advertising and search.
One case, already decided, found Google guilty of monopolizing the search market. Targeting its ad tech empire, the other could redefine the ad ecosystem.
At the heart of the proposed remedies lies the potential divestiture of Chrome and, possibly, Android. Along with search, these pillars of Big G’s business have laid the foundation for the tech behemoth’s grip on the digital landscape.
As the Wall Street Journal notes, separating these products could fracture not only Google’s ecosystem but also the advertising workflows and privacy protocols marketers rely on. And, as Mike Seiman, CEO of Digital Remedy, argues in his recent piece for AdMonsters, the industry is already shifting toward AI-driven tools, CTV platforms, and new search behaviors that could upend the ad tech landscape in ways beyond regulatory intervention.
So, we spoke with nine industry leaders about what these dual cases could mean for the future. We asked:
- How might the digital advertising landscape change if Google is forced to divest Chrome and potentially Android?
- What could be the most significant impact on the ad tech ecosystem if Google’s ad tech business is broken up?
Here’s what they had to say.
9 Ad Tech Leaders React to the DOJ’s Plans for Google
Frank Einecke, CEO of eyeo
“If Google were forced to divest Chrome, it would fundamentally disrupt the current browser landscape. By potentially breaking up the Chrome and Safari duopoly, this move might create opportunities for alternative browsers, extensions, and web technologies to gain meaningful market access—particularly in mobile. The current platforms managed by Google and Apple have created artificial barriers that prevent innovations driven by open, competitive mobile web experiences.”
“The CMA is also investigating this issue, so a potential divestiture could address concerns beyond the DOJ. That said, this ship hasn’t left the harbor, and if it does, it’ll be a long journey. I don’t anticipate any fundamental short-term changes.”
Sherry Smith, Executive Managing Director, Americas, Criteo
“If Google were to sell Chrome, it could revolutionize how consumers discover, research, and purchase products. This paradigm shift would empower retailers to harness advanced technologies like AI and performance media, enabling more personalized and seamless shopping experiences and redefining the traditional path-to-purchase.”
“This potential change presents a unique opportunity for retailers to foster a more open and competitive web environment. By innovating their search and site experiences and integrating performance media strategies, retailers can not only attract and retain users but also enhance marketing opportunities for advertisers. Such transformative changes could reshape the retail landscape, unlocking new paths for growth and engagement.”
Mateusz Jedrocha, Chief Product Officer, Adlook
“The potential separation of Chrome from Google would have profound implications for advertising technologies like Google’s Privacy Sandbox, which has been positioned as a cornerstone of the industry’s privacy-first future. Chrome’s independence could disrupt this trajectory, leaving advertisers and developers in a state of uncertainty.”
“Unwinding Chrome from Google’s ecosystem wouldn’t be a simple or quick process. Regulators would need to carefully assess its cascading effects on competition, privacy, and monopoly concerns. While a more fragmented browser market could foster a healthier ecosystem of independent players, advertisers accustomed to Chrome’s tight integration with Google Ads and Analytics would need to rethink their strategies and adapt to a potentially less streamlined environment.”
“Ultimately, while independence and openness in the browser market can empower advertisers, developers, and users alike, achieving this equilibrium requires thoughtful, deliberate action to avoid unintended consequences that could stifle innovation or harm users.”
Shoshana Winter, CEO of Converge
“The impact will depend on how the divested businesses evolve and how marketers adapt to those changes. Although this would represent a big shift for Google, the digital advertising landscape is more likely to be disrupted by emerging technologies like generative AI on SERPs and social, alongside evolving privacy regulations at federal and platform levels.”
“The industry has matured to the point that adapting to browser and form factor changes isn’t as disruptive as it was a decade ago. However, how aggressively a new steward would pursue privacy initiatives like cookie deprecation remains a significant question.”
“Ultimately, this change could lower barriers to entry for smaller players, particularly if transparency becomes a greater priority in the market. New agreements around how data is captured and shared would need to address ongoing privacy concerns, which could affect everything from cross-ecosystem tracking to user experience.”
Aman Sareen, CEO of Aarki
“It’s highly unlikely that Google, as a tech business, will be broken up. Things are deeply integrated, and even if it were to happen, certain components would likely remain together—such as AdX and Ad Manager forming a unified ad network and buying engine, which could also include the DSP. Google Search could potentially stand alone as a separate product, but that too seems improbable.”
“The advantages to competitors, such as Aarki, are unclear. However, we can envision a scenario where the different entities of a broken-up Google engage in data-sharing or inventory-sharing agreements with other companies, creating a more competitive ecosystem.”
Tyler Jordan, CEO of Jordan Digital Marketing
“Will Google really have to sell Chrome? I’m not sure it will happen—and, if it does, we’re looking at a timeline of years, not months. The prospect, though, could fundamentally change the marketing industry.”
“As marketers, we’ve been planning for a future of severely weakened cookies and, eventually, no third-party cookies. Now, the timing is up in the air. Moving to a first-party cookie tracking world still makes the most sense—it works in all future conditions. The worst-case scenario is that you improve your tracking; the best-case scenario is you’re prepared for one of the biggest changes in digital marketing’s history.”
“Chrome under new ownership represents a fragmentation risk. Web standards have consolidated as the browser market became more concentrated, making it easier to manage site speed and load times—both of which have huge impacts on SEO. If Chrome changes hands, we’ll have to trust that the buyer can maintain these improvements while avoiding market fragmentation.”
Mike Seiman, CEO & Founder of Digital Remedy
“A forced divestiture of Chrome and Android could reshape competition and innovation across the digital advertising ecosystem. Chrome’s separation from Google would impact its integration with Google Ads, potentially reducing the seamless data flow advertisers rely on for targeting and measurement. This could lead to a more fragmented browser market where players like Firefox or Safari gain ground.”
“For Android, a divestiture might slow Google’s mobile ad dominance. A standalone Android could pivot to more neutral positioning, encouraging ad tech vendors to innovate solutions for a broader range of devices. Ultimately, these changes could make the market more competitive, but advertisers will need to navigate increased complexity in audience targeting and data attribution across disconnected ecosystems.”
JC Peube, Chief Operating Officer, Equativ
“The scale of the recommendation from the DOJ has shocked the industry; however, this news will have a positive impact. Chrome represents a massive hold on web-based search and the historical monopoly of Google on advertising spend, originating from paid search. If Google were to divest Chrome, it would forfeit a significant share of advertising revenues from browser-originated searches and the valuable user data that informs strategies across its ecosystem.”
“Android is an equally powerful asset to lose control over. While it has a lower footprint than Chrome in terms of search market share, it provides a more complete view of consumer behaviors across their Android devices. The loss of both Chrome and Android would have a lasting impact on Google. However, it would foster innovation and competitiveness, which historically have led to added value for end users and economic growth across the board.”
“Google’s ad tech business is one of the most significant channels used to monetize their walled garden, with data from YouTube, Chrome, and Android. Any changes to this part of its business will impact monetization, but its ad tech business will survive the change and likely maintain its dominance in the industry. The European Commission recently established that Google abused its dominant position in the ad server and DSP market segments in favor of AdX, their SSP. Forcing Google to divest its walled garden and dominant assets could free up the ad tech industry, allowing other players to compete more effectively for market share.”
Jon Schulz, CMO, Viant Technology
“Breaking up Google will create a clear and immediate increase in both market competition and customer choice–a win for everyone and for the free market economy. Like most, I don’t fault Google for their success and organic growth. However, a number of key acquisitions have created monopolistic positions in several market segments, which is problematic. In the end, fostering greater competition will not only enhance the browsing experience for consumers but also provide advertisers with more choice and innovative options.”
The Ripple Effects of a Google Shake-Up
From browser fragmentation to shifts in ad tech dominance, the potential breakup of Google has industry leaders weighing both opportunities and challenges. While some envision a more competitive landscape that fosters innovation and opens doors for smaller players, others emphasize the risks of fragmentation, uncertainty, and disrupted workflows.
Sherry Smith’s perspective adds an important dimension: the retail landscape could be transformed as Chrome’s divestiture enables more advanced, personalized shopping experiences and opens up new marketing opportunities for advertisers. Whether through AI, performance media, or other innovations, the potential changes underscore the need for marketers and retailers to adapt proactively.
What’s clear is that these dual antitrust cases are not just about Google’s future—they’re about the evolution of the entire digital ecosystem. Adaptability and innovation will be critical as the industry navigates this transformative moment.
Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this article omitted reactions from JC Peube, Chief Operating Officer, Equativ, and Jon Schulz, CMO, Viant Technology. The addition of their response changed the total ad tech reactions in this article from 7 to 9.