"We never compromised the quality or relevance of the information we received. On the contrary, we improved it. That isn't 'favoring' -- that's listening to our customers."
Google is stating the truth. It's just that we have to keep in mind who Google's customers are. The vast majority of Google service users are cattle and not customers. We don't pay Google any money, and in return Google doesn't consider the impact of their actions on the general public. There are cases where Google interests coincidentally align with general public interests, but that's just coincidental. The drivers of Google actions are Google customers. I certainly wouldn't blame Google for fulfilling their fiduciary responsibilities to their stockholders, but at the same time, it would be disingenuous of Google to claim that they aren't willfully harming the interests of their customers' competitors.
Of course, all of this is really tangential to the legal question at hand, which is whether Google is abusing it's dominant market position.