Amazon US accused of rigging search engine to promote 'own' brands

Amazon systematically prioritises its own private-label products and brands at the top of search results, sidelining superior third-party competitors and misleading consumers about why certain products are "featured," according to a n investigation . What happened Based on data provided by 3,400 product searchers in January 2021, The Markup found that Amazon brands and exclusives received an 'outsized portion of the top spot on search results' while only accounting for a small proportion of products on the company's platform. The study used machine learning to determine that being an Amazon brand was the single most predictive factor for achieving a top ranking, accounting for the top spot in 70 percent of cases regardless of quality. These "rigged" results were often disguised under the label "featured from our brands," which Amazon internally classified as "merchandising" rather than advertising or organic search results, thereby avoiding the standard "sponsored" labels that third-party sellers must pay for. The Markup also conducted a survey showing that most US consumers are unable to identify Solimo, Pinzon, and other top-selling house brands , many of which are not clearly labelled as owned by Amazon. Over 150 Amazon house brands and 137,000 unique house brand and exclusive products were identified during the investigation. Why it happened T he incident is seen to stem from a fundamental conflict of interest: Amazon acts as both the marketplace owner and a primary competitor within that marketplace. Internal documents and former employees suggested that Amazon executives pressured search engineers to prioritise profitability over customer relevance. By promoting its own brands, which have higher profit margins since Amazon controls the entire supply chain, the company prioritised its bottom line over the "customer obsession" it publicly champions. Reports also highlighted that Amazon allegedly covertly used proprietary data from third-party sellers to identify successful products, create cheaper knockoffs, and then use its algorithm to ensure those knockoffs outranked the originals. What it means For sellers: Small and medium-sized businesses face an unlevel playing field where they must spend heavily on advertising just to compete with Amazon’s "free" top-tier placement. This "pay-to-play" environment erodes the margins of independent entrepreneurs. For consumers: Shoppers are nudged toward products that may be of lower quality or higher price simply because they are more profitable for Amazon. The lack of clear disclosure prevents consumers from making informed, unbiased purchasing decisions. For society: The findings have fueled global antitrust momentum. Following the report, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee accused Amazon executives of potentially lying to Congress, and the findings became a cornerstone of the FTC’s 2023 antitrust lawsuit against the company. It highlights the urgent need for "platform neutrality" laws to prevent tech giants from using their gatekeeper status to crush competition. System 🤖 Amazon A9 Developer: Amazon Country: USA Sector: Retail Purpose: Rank content/search results Technology : Search engine algorithm Issue: Accountability; Competition/monopolisation; Confidentiality; Fairness; Transparency Resource s 📃 Amazon. Responses to Questions for the Record following the July 16, 2019, Hearing of the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law, Committee on the Judiciary, Entitled “Online Platforms and Market Power, Part 2: Innovation and Entrepreneurship” Timeline ⏰ June 2019. The U.S. House Judiciary Committee antitrust subcommittee investigates competitive practices at Amazon, Alphabet, Apple, and Facebook. During the hearings, Amazon associate general counsel Nate Sutton argues that Amazon algorithms 'are optimised to predict what customers want to buy regardless of the seller.' October 2021. Reuters reveals Amazon documents that show the co mpany has been copying pr

Date it happened

2021-10-01

Organisation involved

Amazon

Product, system or model

Amazon A9

This is a record of what was reported, not a finding that anyone broke the law. If it names your organisation and you believe it is wrong, the corrections process is free and open to everyone.