Why is the CMA asking us to choose the furniture before the house? The UK’s search choice screens need browser choice screens alongside them

Mobile browsers are a key gateway to the internet for 56 million people in the UK. Smartphone users spend around half an hour a day in these apps, and opening a browser is the most common way they look up information online.

Yet most people are using a smartphone browser that was preinstalled and set as the default for them, without ever being asked which browser they would actually prefer.

Mozilla believes people deserve an active choice in the tools they depend on every day, which is why the latest proposals from the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) matter. We welcome the CMA’s plans to give people a choice of search service and are asking it to consult on browser choice now, so both screens can launch together.

On September 23rd, the CMA published updated plans that would require Google to show people in the UK a choice of search service on new Android devices, covering the default search app and home-screen search widget as well as Chrome. Search choice screens would also appear in Chrome on other platforms, including through a major update for existing users. Some AI assistants would also be eligible to appear alongside search engines.

The proposals are well designed, but solve only half the problem

The CMA’s mobile browser investigation found that preinstallation, prominent placement and default settings restrict browser competition. Mozilla’s innovative 2023 experiment showed that properly designed browser choice screens can help people choose a browser they expect to keep using, and can be an effective tool for giving people agency over their online life. It also showed that an overwhelming majority of people (98%!) want to see them. 

The EU Digital Markets Act has since demonstrated their impact in practice. We welcome the CMA’s work on search choice, but people in the UK deserve browser choice too. Asking people to pick a search service inside a browser that most of them never actively chose in the first place leaves some of the biggest issues identified in the CMA’s own mobile browser investigation unaddressed.

The CMA commissioned user research on search choice screens to refine and improve the proposals it first consulted on in January. Providers’ positions on the choice screen would be fully randomised. Users would have to scroll to the bottom before confirming, and could “test drive” a search provider for at least a week.

The CMA has also recognized that search is changing. Its research found that many people were already using AI assistants to search alongside traditional search services. Under the revised, more technology-neutral eligibility criteria, an AI assistant could also qualify to appear on the search choice screen if it meets the requirements, including being able to search the web and attribute its sources. But browser choice should not be left behind.

Why the two choices belong together

• Less confusion. The CMA’s new research found that participants often confused browsers with search services and were unsure what their search choice would change. Mozilla’s research has revealed similar confusion. These findings support designing and testing the two screens together, with clear explanations of each decision.
  
• Less duplication. The CMA’s work on search choice can also inform browser choice. Developing the two together would allow the design, order and timing to be tested as one journey, helping to avoid separate rounds of changes and interruptions for users.
  
• Order matters. Nobody chooses the furniture before the house. Browsers have their own search defaults, which is why we recommend showing the browser choice screen first, followed by the search screen, with wording that makes clear these are two separate decisions. 

The EU and Japan already show both screens

The EU’s Digital Markets Act introduced browser choice screens on iOS for the first time and brought browser and search choice together during Android set-up.

Browser first, then search, so the relationship between the two makes sense. In Japan, search and browser choice screens are presented on both Android and iOS.

And people are making use of the browser screen to select alternatives. In May, we reported Firefox is selected through a DMA choice screen once every ten seconds, with retention five times higher than for organic downloads. Other independent browsers have also reported substantial growth. 

Choice matters more as AI moves into the browser

The CMA’s proposals recognize that AI is changing how people search. AI is also changing what browsers offer, adding to the ways they compete on features, privacy and user control. Firefox already lets people on desktop pick which AI assistant sits in the sidebar, and our Smart Window beta extends that choice to the model behind the browser’s own assistant. There are meaningful differences between browsers. AI is the latest example of why giving people an active choice matters.

When people aren’t offered an active browser choice, they may be choosing search and AI services within a browser someone else picked. One decision taken at the factory can end up shaping the ones that follow. A search choice screen gives people a say over their search provider; offering browser choice alongside it would give them a say over that first decision too.

Our ask of the CMA

We’re asking the CMA to consult now on browser choice screens for Apple’s and Google’s mobile platforms, so they can launch alongside the search screens. Apple and Google already offer browser choice screens in the EU and Japan. The CMA can draw on that experience and its own research to give people in the UK an active choice of both browser and search service.

Mozilla’s response to the consultation is available here.

The post Why is the CMA asking us to choose the furniture before the house? The UK’s search choice screens need browser choice screens alongside them appeared first on The Mozilla Blog.