By Sara Guaglione  •  February 3, 2026  •

Ivy Liu

Several major U.S. publishers have filed lawsuits against Google in New York City, claiming that the tech giant’s dominance over ad servers and exchanges made it difficult for publishers to use other platforms, and kept prices for publisher inventory low. They want to be reimbursed. 

“The DOJ has done a lot of heavy lifting for [publishers],” said Gary Kibel, partner at law firm Davis+Gilbert, which advises media and advertising clients. “This judge has already ruled that [Google] engaged in anti-competitive behavior when it comes to the ad tech business. So you’re more than halfway there already… Now what the publishers then need to do is get a different judge in a different court to agree with that decision. But that may not be a huge lift.”

The harder lift, according to Kibel, will be for these publishers to show evidence of how they’ve been damaged by Google’s monopoly. 

“These publishers are going to have to prove not just that Google hurt the industry, but that Google hurt me [them]. They have to show that Google hurt [their] business by their anti-competitive behavior. That gets very fact-specific,” Kibel said.

Google is appealing the ruling.

All of the lawsuits allege that Google used its monopoly to control how publishers sell their ad slots, which forced publishers to sell larger shares of that ad space through Google, at depressed prices – leading to less revenue for publishers. They claim that Google’s ability to view competitors’ bids in ad auctions (called a “last look”) gave it an advantage over its competitors. Some of them repeat the same core clauses word for word in their lawsuits, signaling publishers’ legal teams are coordinating their claims and demands.

Here is an example of some of the claims from publishers filing lawsuits that are repeated verbatim in these lawsuits:

• “Google has carried out a sophisticated, anticompetitive, and deceptive scheme for well over a decade.”
• “Google uses this monopoly to control how publishers sell their ad slots, forcing publishers to sell growing shares of that ad space through Google at depressed prices.”
• “The result is dramatically less revenue for publishers and Google’s ad tech rivals, while Google reaps exorbitant monopoly profits.”
• “Google manipulates the process of real-time bidding to exclude rival exchanges and underpay for publisher inventory.”
• “Google traded on inside information and bought [this publisher]’s inventory on the cheap.”
• “Google can buy an inflated share of [this publisher]’s ad inventory at artificially depressed prices and starve rival exchanges of opportunities to fairly compete.”
• “Minimum Bid to Win remains in effect to this day, and [this publisher] continues to suffer significant financial injury.”

These publishers’ lawsuits urge the court to prohibit Google from tying its publisher ad server to its ad exchange and restore competition, and to be paid “compensatory damages.”

“The door’s open. Now the question is, who’s going to run through it?” Kibel said.

Digiday has compiled a running list of publishers’ lawsuits against Google for its ad tech practices, organized by most recent filing date, rather than in chronological order. We will continue to update this tracker, if and when new lawsuits are filed. All of these publishers are represented by the same law firm – Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick – and the complaints were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Advance Publications

Date of lawsuit filing: January 14, 2026

Main claims:

• “Advance’s web properties and mobile applications serve more than 200 million monthly users… Providing a broad range of high-quality content to that large and varied audience requires large and ongoing investment in human talent, technology, and infrastructure. To that end, Advance has relied on digital advertising for a significant percentage of its revenues, which helps fund its vast production of content shown to readers on its web properties and mobile apps.”
• “Digital advertising is a $200 billion business — a ninefold increase since 2009. Yet, Advance has not shared equally with Google in this massive digital advertising market despite its relative size, proven value to readers, and industry prestige.”

McClatchy

Date of lawsuit filing: January 14, 2026

Main claims:

• “McClatchy brings this antitrust action for compensation and for injunctive relief to restore competition in the monopolized markets and protect the production of trusted, essential content millions of Americans rely on.”
• “Both in the past and now, any revenue generated from subscriptions and other non-advertising sources could not, alone, fund McClatchy’s publications. McClatchy’s publications need advertising revenue — and today, digital advertising revenue specifically — to sustain their operations.” 

Date of lawsuit filing: January 14, 2026

Main claims:

• “Vox Media relies on digital advertising for well over half of its revenue and funds its vast production of digital content primarily through digital advertising. Vox Media’s ad sales thus provide critical income and revenue for its provision of engaging online content consumed by users in this country and abroad.”
• “Any revenue generated from subscriptions and other non-advertising sources could not, alone, fund the volume and breadth of Vox Media’s high-quality content.”
• “Vox Media needs advertising revenue — and today, digital advertising revenue specifically — to sustain its operations.”

The Atlantic

Date of lawsuit filing: January 13, 2026

Main claims:

• “Google Ads demand (and therefore AdX) is particularly important for The Atlantic. The Atlantic does not have an alternative way to access advertising spending from the long tail of small- or medium-sized advertisers who buy mostly, or exclusively, through Google Ads. Smaller advertisers are disproportionately likely to use Google Ads as their DSP. The Atlantic cannot forgo the significant revenue it earns from the Google Ads demand available only through AdX. Not earning that revenue would reduce The Atlantic’s ability to invest in providing high-quality journalism.”
• “A fair, real-time auction, by contrast, would result in more publisher revenue, which would allow for greater investment in more content that readers value.”

Date of lawsuit filing: January 12, 2026

Main claims:

• “SheMedia runs all aspects of advertising sales and operations for its network of content creators, selling ad inventory for approximately 1,800 websites. Almost all of the SHE Media Collective content creators’ websites are free to the public and fund themselves with digital advertising dollars, making digital advertising the lifeblood of their businesses.”
• “Without SheMedia, those creators would find it exceedingly difficult to monetize their creative endeavors. SheMedia’s ad sales thus provide critical income and revenue for thousands of American households and businesses and support engaging online content viewed by millions of readers in this country and abroad.”

Penske Media has a separate lawsuit against Google for the use of its AI summaries in search, AI Overviews, claiming the feature affects traffic and revenue.

Business Insider

Date of lawsuit filing: September 8, 2025

Main claims:

• “By employing those tactics, Google has depressed Business Insider’s revenues, which Business Insider otherwise would have invested in its business, ultimately yielding a greater output of advertising impressions.”
• “Business Insider does not have an alternative way to access advertising spending from the small- or medium-sized advertisers who buy mostly or exclusively through Google Ads. Smaller advertisers are disproportionately likely to use Google Ads as their DSP.”
• “Business Insider could not afford to forgo the most valuable real-time bids from the largest exchange, even though it did not want to hand over control of its inventory to Google.”
• “It is too costly to use different ad servers to sell different kinds of inventory.”
• “Business Insider has no interest in a single firm providing it with an ad exchange along with an ad server… Having the same company control the sell-side and the exchange creates a conflict of interest.”
• “The effect of the tie has been to reduce publishers’ revenue, which otherwise would have been invested to spur more content and growth, yielding greater output of impressions available for sale.”

People Inc.

Date of lawsuit filing: August 29, 2025

Main claims:

• “Any revenue generated from subscriptions or newsstand fees could not, alone, fund People Inc.’s extensive investments in high-quality content.”
• “People Inc. needs advertising revenue — and today, digital advertising revenue specifically — to sustain its operations.”
• “People Inc. does not have an alternative way to access advertising spending from the long tail of small- or medium-sized advertisers who buy mostly, or exclusively, through Google Ads.”
• “Millions of small- to medium-sized advertisers now use Google Ads (and no other DSP) to bid on and purchase digital ad space. That demand is available to publishers only if they sell inventory through AdX.”
• “Absent Google’s conduct, People Inc. would be able to make available even more, higher-quality impressions for purchase on People Inc.’s webpages.” 
• “Google’s misrepresentations and omissions are material and have resulted in a significant loss of revenue for People Inc. People Inc.’s injury persists today.”
• “People Inc. has sustained and continues to sustain significant revenue loss.”

Pre-DOJ trial lawsuits that publishers brought against Google:

• A New York federal judge ruled in favor of USA Today Co and Daily Mail in a partial summary judgment in October 2025, holding Google liable for illegally monopolizing its ad tech business.
• In 2023, USA Today Co. (formerly known as Gannett) filed a lawsuit accusing Google of monopolizing ad tech markets and depressing publisher revenues. 
• In 2021, The Daily Mail filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google, claiming its control over search and display advertising squeezed digital publishers out of revenue.