New Video Exposes Google's Deceptive Answers Under Oath

For those interested in powerful evidence that many parts of Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt's Senate antitrust testimony September 21st under oath were apparently false, deceptive or misleading, please don't miss Foundem's 29 minute annotated fact-checking video of Mr. Schmidt's testimony.


  • Foundem, a British product search competitor that has filed an antitrust suit against Google in the EU, has both the expertise and detailed-knowledge-base to fact-check and challenge Google's apparently extensive prevarication before the Senate.
  • Using Mr. Schmidt's own responses to questions under oath, Foundem repeatedly provides evidence that Google apparently provided false, deceptive or misleading answers to questions about potential illegal anti-competitive behavior by Google.
  • The video is must viewing for investigators of Google's antitrust alleged violations at the EU, the FTC, the DOJ, Korea, the Attorneys General of at least Texas, California, and New York; as well as the members and staff of the Senate and House Antitrust subcommittees responsible for overseeing the enforcement of antitrust laws.


In a nutshell, the video shows how Mr. Schmidt's responses to several questions about whether Google biases its search results for Google's benefit apparently are untrue or deceptive.

It also provides strong evidence supporting the conclusions of Subcommittee Ranking Member, Senator Mike Lee that:


  • Google's search is not a level playing field as it has represented;
  • Google has a clear and inherent conflict meaning Google is not an honest broker; and
  • Google violates consumers' expectations of unbiased search results.


This video is timely because Google's answers to the Senate Antitrust Subcommittee's ~100 written follow-up questions are due November 4th.

Practically, this video evidence begs the question if the Senate Antitrust Subcommittee should have a follow-up hearing to get to the bottom of this matter or if the Subcommittee should ask the appropriate authorities to determine if the Subcommittee was told the truth or not.

Lastly, this video begs the question why the House Antitrust Subcommittee has not yet scheduled a hearing to explore these matters and fulfill its antitrust law enforcement oversight responsibilities. There is now more than enough evidence on the record to warrant a House hearing.