Pick an economy a news article belongs to efficiency and fairness and summarize it and do you agree or not and how the article belongs to efficiency and fairness of marketing.
Efficiency and fairness of marketing
What evidence do we have that the markets are fair or clean? The obligation of regulators is to assure investors that the integrity of markets would be retained, that is by being fair and efficient as well. In the real sense, there have been no indulgences to ascertain the fairness of the markets (Gabor, B. 2013). A very notable example when pointing out this issue is one article “China’s digital monopolies are killing competition and need to be regulated” by Chen Xinlei posted on the South China Morning Post website. The article is a logical consequence of an explanation which equates market fairness being in the extent to which participants in a given market are involved in outlawed trading behaviors like market manipulation and insider trading. The article which points out unhealthy competition flooded by digital monopolies, in the long run, would develop massive losses incurred by all players including consumers. Broker-client conflict emerges when lawsuits start flying around when digital giants begin using their dominance to suit their own gains (Chen Xinlei 2015).
The article gives an example of how Google manipulates its search engines reducing customer satisfaction by one third. It’s because companies operating via the internet largely are largely dependent on their users accessing their network, this effect has a direct proportion to entice more users. Usually caused by the failure of these companies to diverse on external aspects and in the long run, only one wins and manipulates the whole market like Google. It explains such scenarios lead up to the creation of natural monopoly which is usually very common defined by an instance of one company serving the whole market. But because natural monopolies would lead to overregulation of prices, the governments step in to limit/ set the prices or limit market entry so that the companies available share a bigger market thus saving the costs. The internet gives users freedom and these internet giants tend to use manipulation like monopoly pricing to enrich themselves with investigators having very little effect on them.
The government is urged to act instead of letting manipulation due to people’s ignorance of this monopoly. They can avoid this by noting key features of the internet industries like first giving data a higher priority as equivalent to oil (energy) or railway since in the near future it would be as important and crucial as fuel today. Second, internet giants manipulate the market by monopolizing the web traffic, for example by altering the algorithm of another company, they can easily influence their users and corner this traffic the way they feel the market should be.
This article exhibits a lot of efficiency and fairness that should be portrayed so that equality attained by all players within a market. It highlights more attention focused on increased successful entrepreneurship that would translate to less attention focused on monopolizing the market. Failure to tame this beast would deny benefits of healthy competition in addition to minimizing entrepreneurship and technological progress. Regulators are advised to be aware of the advancement of monopoly in diverse internet markets. Therefore the best step forward for fairness would insist the internet giants/ monopolies abide by set regulations and rules to enhance public welfare.
Chen Xinlei (2015). China’s digital monopolies are killing competition and need to be regulated. Published on 19 August, 2015. Retrived from http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1850448/chinas-digital-monopolies-are-killing-competition-and-need
Gabor, B. (2013). Regulatory competition in the internal market: Comparing models for corporate law, securities law and competition law. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Pg 22,23