For years, critics have warned that Google’s unchecked power over the digital information pipeline threatens not only competition, but the free flow of ideas in a functioning democracy. Today, that concern is no longer academic. It is urgent. It is real. And it is time—past time—for the United States government to take decisive action and break up Google.

Nowhere is Google’s abuse of its monopoly power more glaring than in its manipulation of search results to bury dissenting voices and sideline independent, conservative journalism. A particularly damning example? The Jewish Voice (TJVNews.com)—a widely read, original-content conservative Jewish publication—is virtually invisible on Google Search.

TJVNews.com publishes news and opinion articles that are composed of original, fact-driven reporting. These stories are easily found on Bing, DuckDuckGo, and other search engines, but on Google—still the default portal for the majority of the world’s information seekers—they are erased. Hidden. Deplatformed. This is not an algorithmic quirk. This is an algorithmic weapon.

Despite repeated assertions by Google that their systems do not discriminate based on political views, the case of The Jewish Voice raises deeply disturbing questions. Millions of readers visit TJVNews.com, yet virtually none of its stories surface in Google Search results—not even for direct headlines. Meanwhile, larger left-leaning or “mainstream” publications with thinner, aggregated content routinely rank in the top slots.

Let us be clear: Google does not owe anyone a top ranking, but when its algorithm completely erases a legitimate news outlet with original reporting, the line between algorithmic filtering and ideological censorship is crossed. That line isn’t blurry anymore. It’s bold and bright—and Google is stomping all over it.

Google’s explanation is the digital equivalent of gaslighting. “Our systems look for quantifiable signals to assess relevance, but they are not designed to analyze subjective concepts such as the viewpoint or political leaning of a page’s content.” Nonsense.

If Google’s algorithm is truly blind to political leanings, then why do left-leaning publications with shallow SEO structures and recycled wire service stories routinely appear on page one, while a right-leaning publication like The Jewish Voice, with well-structured, keyword-optimized, original reporting, doesn’t appear at all?

“Political leanings do not influence how Google ranks search results… we never manipulate search results.” This is a lie cloaked in plausible deniability. Google doesn’t need to explicitly program “suppress conservative news.” All it needs to do is structure its systems to reward “authoritative” sources, a term it conveniently defines based on internal, ideologically loaded metrics—most of which favor legacy institutions that are either friendly to or aligned with progressive worldviews.

Even Google’s vaunted reliance on “aggregated and anonymized interaction data” is a Trojan horse. Those data inputs are themselves conditioned by past manipulations—if conservative sites are made less visible, users can’t engage with them, and Google can then claim that “nobody’s clicking,” justifying even deeper suppression.

As for Google’s invocation of Stanford and The Economist? These so-called “independent” studies are themselves products of institutions with long-standing ideological leanings. It is no coincidence that studies designed to audit bias consistently rely on Google’s own frameworks of “reputability” and “trustworthiness” to validate outcomes. That is circular logic, not scientific rigor.

“Google rewards reputable reporting,” The Economist claims. Reputable to whom? To Google’s curators? To progressive academic reviewers? The Jewish Voice is no less “reputable” than dozens of legacy outlets given privileged access to Google’s algorithmic ladder—many of whom have published outright falsehoods and retractions on major issues like COVID, Russia, and Middle East policy.

Google’s Lawbreaking Is No Longer Alleged—It’s Proven

Beyond its suppression of dissenting media voices, Google is increasingly being held accountable by courts of law, not just public opinion.

In April 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice secured a major antitrust victory against Google in the Eastern District of Virginia. The court found that Google had illegally monopolized open-web digital advertising markets, harming both publishers and consumers. The ruling came after a 15-day trial and concluded that Google abused its dominance to manipulate ad auctions, stifle competition, and centralize control over digital information flow.

“This is a landmark victory in the ongoing fight to stop Google from monopolizing the digital public square,” declared Attorney General Pamela Bondi, as reported by The New York Post. Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater added, “Google’s unlawful dominance allows them to censor and even deplatform American voices… The Court’s ruling is clear: Google is a monopolist and has abused its monopoly power.”

The DOJ’s victory is not isolated. It follows a sweeping civil lawsuit filed in January 2023 in collaboration with several state attorneys general, including Virginia’s, accusing Google of anti-competitive behavior through its control of the so-called “ad tech stack.” Through a series of acquisitions, auction manipulation schemes, and exclusionary contracts, Google carved out an illegal stronghold over digital advertising.

And the legal setbacks don’t stop there.

Just this past Friday, as reported by The New York Times, Google agreed to pay $1.4 billion to the State of Texas to settle two lawsuits that accused the tech giant of violating state residents’ privacy by secretly tracking their locations, storing their search histories, and collecting facial recognition data without consent. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton emphasized that “Big Tech is not above the law.”

In just the last two years, Google has faced—and lost—multiple antitrust cases, involving its search engine dominance, app store monopolization, and now advertising control. The company has also had to scramble in court to fend off U.S. government demands to break it up—which, at this point, is the only acceptable remedy for the scale of damage inflicted.

The Solution: Break It Up—Now

What more evidence do we need? Google is not just biased, it is lawless. It’s not merely a platform—it’s a gatekeeper with an ideological agenda and the tools to enforce it across every corner of the internet.

The United States government must act now. Congress should immediately move to break up Google’s business divisions, separating search, YouTube, and its advertising empire, as well as mandating transparency in algorithmic decision-making, with independent audits not controlled by Google allies.

The government should also protect independent publishers and voices from algorithmic exile, and ensure equitable treatment in search results as well as enforcing data privacy laws, as they penalize deceptive practices, and return control of user data to individuals.

The Jewish Voice’s disappearance from Google Search is not a bug. It’s a feature of a system that has arrogated to itself the power to determine what counts as truth—and what deserves to vanish. That is not a business model. That is a regime.

Now we know the truth: Google breaks the law, manipulates markets, crushes competitors, censors political speech, and lies about it all. This cannot be allowed to continue.

The United States government must confront this threat head-on. That means filing and pursuing full-scale antitrust proceedings against Google with the aim of breaking up its monopolistic grip over online search, advertising, and content distribution. No single company should control 90% of internet searches—and certainly not a company that uses its power to quietly eliminate its ideological opponents.

Congress must also hold public hearings on algorithmic censorship, compel Google executives to testify under oath, and subpoena internal documents detailing how “relevance,” “authority,” and “trust” are defined and applied in real time. Enough with the opaque “we trust the machine” defenses. Americans deserve transparency.

Finally, alternative search engines must be encouraged through federal investment, competitive neutrality mandates, and consumer protections that allow people to freely and fairly access all credible viewpoints—regardless of political flavor.

Break up Google now. Before democracy becomes another entry the algorithm decides you shouldn’t see.