[crazygringo]

I'm not saying it's not bad for competition.

I'm saying the blame is 100% with Reddit.

Blaming Google for accepting it makes no sense. That's like if a shopper goes to grocery store and buys an expensive $20 piece of cheese, and other shoppers can't afford cheese that pricey, and you're blaming that one shopper for buying it because it means other shoppers can't also get the cheese without paying for it. That doesn't make any sense. The store set the price, and they're the one to blame if other shoppers can't afford it.

If Bing, DDG and others can't reach a deal with Reddit, that has nothing to do with Google.

Again, blame here is 100% on Reddit, and 0% on Google. To assign blame to a purchaser in a case like this doesn't make any sense.

[dvngnt_]

bing probably has the money to reach a deal, smaller companies without monopolies is less likely, and that's the problem.

i don't think google is blameless like you propose.

[crazygringo]

> bing probably has the money to reach a deal, smaller companies without monopolies is less likely, and that's the problem.

Reddit can charge smaller companies less money. So if there's a problem, again, the problem is 100% with Reddit.

Google is absolutely blameless here. You may not like Google, and you can certainly blame them for plenty of other things. But in this situation, literally all of the blame is with Reddit for deciding to remove their content from all search engines unless they pay. Reddit didn't have to do that. Google didn't make them do that.

Reddit did this. Not Google.

[dvngnt_]

takes two tango. reddit can't do anything without google signing papers as well

[bryan_w]

I don't think you're right about that.