-
swodinsky This is a very specific term because a while back antitrust law was restructured so that the size of a company, or its impact on the markets, was no longer a consideration, it was--through judicial review--changed to be "consumer harm through high prices"Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood -3 🙁
-
swodinsky This is what's frustrating w/the regulation conversation, basically the FTC has to gut-up or there has to be a law change to redefine what harms consumers and that's the big challenge that needs to be overcome to fix this and it drives me CRAZY b/c it should be obvious but JUDGESPermalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood -6 🙁
-
swodinsky Like... there are CLEARLY other harms that large companies can and do perform that impact consumers and their ability to purchase things outside of those things' sticker prices. And also that's a fkin terrible measure b/c what about *society* etc...On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites
Mood 0
-
swodinsky This is why linakhanFTC's work before the FTC was so disruptive... because it aimed to redefine how we understand monopoly and trust and government responsibility. But IMO I think it's not just that work that needs to be done, we need to start talking in terms of consumer harms.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 3 Favorites
Mood -2 🙁
-
swodinsky linakhanFTC Redefining consumer harm should be a core research topic... but I don't see a lot done tracing the impact that... say ma&pa moving ad buys away from the local newspaper to Facebook... can have on the community, the consumer behavior within it, and ma&pa long term.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 4 Favorites
Mood -2 🙁
-
swodinsky If I was a local journalist anymore, I'd be deeply interested in trying to trace back those threads and understand how "cheap ad buys" can impact a community in a larger way. But that's incredibly hard to do as local news often can barely cover the basics.Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood +1 🙂