[单选题]
Google already owns the biggest search engine， the most popular video-streaming site (YouTube)，the biggest mobile operating system (Android) and the dominant e-mail service (Gmail).All of these feed a digital-advertising business that generated $ 135 billion of sales last year.Do we really want to add Fitbit’s fitness tracking to its armory?
A coalition of 20 organizations on Thursday urged antitrust authorities in the European Union， the U.S.and five other jurisdictions to scrutinize the takeover more closely.The EU plans to rule on the deal by July 20， although it may extend the probe if needed.
The problem is that Google’s dominance in one market—digital advertising—isn’t necessarily enough， from an antitrust perspective， to block a deal in another sector.Google doesn’t currently make a health tracker or smartwatch.As such， it doesn’t compete with Fitbit.It isn’t trying to consolidate the market or cut the number of rivals.Indeed， a better capitalized Fitbit might improve competition in a smartwatch market dominated by Apple Inc.
But this deal isn’t really about hardware sales.The value from the acquisition is in the data that Fitbit is accumulating on all of its users.Knowing how far， how often and where people walk， run， cycle or swim every day could help advertisers， health insurers， city planners and plenty more besides.While Google is unlikely to sell that information directly to advertisers， it would help it build more complete advertising profiles of its users.In that sense， the fitness tracker market isn’t separate from Google’s dominant ad-tech business.It could feed it， extending its dominance.
With that in mind， regulators could impose restrictions while still clearing the deal.Aitor Ortiz， a Bloomberg Intelligence analyst， expects behavioral remedies will be imposed.That could mean Google promising not to merge Fitbit data with other user info without explicit consent.
For those alarmed about Alphabet hoarding even more of our personal data， these promises probably won’t be enough.A stronger remedy would be to prohibit Google from ever extracting fitness information from a user’s devices.Google insists that it wants Fitbit anyway， even without being able to farm its data.If that’s true， then it shouldn’t have any complaint about such a restriction.The purchase would still give it an entree to the ever-burgeoning smartwatch market.
This is an important test case that will be hard for regulators to get right.Past attempts at imposing behavioral remedies on the tech giants have failed： Facebook Inc.told Brussels back in 2014 that it wasn’t technically possible to merge its data with those of WhatsApp， but then it went ahead and did it anyway ， accepting a paltry 110 million-euro fine for breaking its agreement.Google tends to be better-behaved than Facebook ， but its deep pockets give it a lot of power.
Given the risks， the easiest solution might just be to block the Fitbit deal outright.But that would be legally harder to justify.
The author holds that a stronger remedy______.
Awould allow Google to merge Fitbit data with other user info.
Bwould discourage Google from taking over Fitbit.
Cwould not hinder Google from entering smartwatch market.
Dwould not incur any complaint from Google.
参考答案：C
[单选题]
Much of the news business is being hammered by the decline in advertising because of Covid-19， just when the public most needs reliable information. While digital audiences are way up， the rapid contraction in revenue has so far caused 33，000 news media employees to be laid off or to suffer reduced pay. But in the midst of this crisis， something very good just happened for journalism： French antitrust authorities ordered Google to negotiate with publishers to pay for the news content shown in search results.
France’s action stems from a new European Union Copyright Directive. This means that in the United States， the pressure to similarly compensate stressed local publishers will be extremely high. There are several ways the pressure on Google could be brought to bear. If Congress passes the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act， publishers would be allowed to negotiate rates with Google as a group. Alternatively， publishers might finally be forced to undertake their own lengthy copyright lawsuits. In any case， Google will eventually be required to treat news publishers， like music publishers，as equals.
It has been proposed for some time that the big tech platforms should be an answer for journalism， rather than a problem. They are the main distributors of news and they benefit greatly from the engagement that comes with it. These platforms pay for music and lots of other kinds of content， and last year Facebook even agreed to pay a limited number of publishers for its News Tab. But most local publishers were left out of that deal. And Google has refused to pay them anything.
A group of French publishers didn’t accept that situation and brought a case against Google with the French competition regulator in November. On April 9， the regulatory agency decided that Google had abused its tremendous market power by refusing to negotiate. This decision is part of a larger， continuing competition investigation into Google. Once again， Europeans have been willing to be the first to address the power of the online platforms.
Google’s market share of search in France was 90 percent at the end of 2019， and data provided by more than 30 French publishers showed that between 26 percent and 90 percent of their referral traffic came through search engines， mainly Google. Google likes to claim that referral traffic is a huge benefit to publishers， even though it dominates the digital ad system and captures most of the benefit from that traffic.
The digital platforms have a choice to make. They can get on the right side of history， quickly negotiate deals and help sustain journalism. Or they can fight and delay， while watching huge segments of the local news ecosystem wither and die in the meantime. If Facebook and Google are the good guys they say they are，they should skip the blood and the blame and jump right to the inevitable， fair conclusion. Pay for news now and help local journalism survive.
Which of the following is true of referral traffic?______.
AIt is a disadvantage to news publishers.
BGoogle reaps most of the ad profits from it.
CIt is a digital mechanism monopolized by Google.
DMore than 90% of it comes through search engines.
参考答案：B
[单选题]
In June， California department of forestry and fire protection determined that 12 devastating fires that struck Northern California late last year were the result of trees coming into contact with power lines or other problems tied to the electric utility PG & E.Thanks to a policy known as inverse condemnation， the utility could be on the hook for those damages， even if it is not found to be negligent.
In the past， PG&E has paid the bills when it was blamed for fires and other damages.But the company now says it cannot keep footing the bill so long as climate change continues to increase the likelihood of fires.Millions of trees have died across California after years of intense drought， creating vast quantities of fuel that allow fires to burn faster and over greater distances--all combined with higher temperatures.It has pushed to raise electricity rates to pay for the damage.
Meanwhile? state officials are pushing a change in the law.Governor Jerry Brown proposed a new plan that would allow a court to decide whether the utility acted “reasonably” before forcing the company to pay claims.“Costly wildfires and natural disasters have the potential to undermine the system，” Brown told legislators，“leaving our energy sector in a state of weakness at a time when it should be making even greater investments in safety.”
Within the U.S.， the debate over liability for climate change has taken several forms.On the federal level ， proactive policymakers have pushed to rework the National Flood Insurance Program ( NFIP)， which pays people to rebuild their homes after floods-even in areas where damage is likely to strike again.In effect， that program， which is more than $ 20 billion in debt， puts the burden of climatechange-related natural disasters in the hands of the U.S.government and the taxpayer.Infrastructure experts have also pushed the government to rethink its post disaster funding to require climate change preparedness measures.
A group of pioneering American cities have sought to have the oil-and-gas industry pay for climate-change- related damages and disaster- prevention measures.A series of lawsuits have blamed the companies for years of polluting the planet while concealing evidence that emissions would contribute to devastating climate change.The authorities behind the lawsuits hope that courts will force the industry to pay up.
Thus far， U.S.courts have expressed skepticism-not necessarily of the fault of oil and gas but of the ability of the judicial system to address the issue."The problem deserves a solution on a more vast scale than can be supplied by a district judge or jury in a public nuisance case，" wrote William Alsup of the U.S.District Court in Northern California.
Elsewhere， a large number of litigants have also looked to the courts.Lacking other avenues for addressing the issue， people feeling the impacts of climate change are increasingly turning to courts to help find a global answer to a global problem.
In Jerry Brown's opinion， the right thing to do now is to______.
Aforce PG&E to pay for fire damages
Bdetermine whether PG&E acted properly
Climit the cost of natural disasters
Dincrease investment in the energy sector
参考答案：B
[单选题]
Congressional Republicans and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau(CFPB) are clashing over a question that has implications far beyond the world of finance： How far can companies go to protect themselves from customer lawsuits? Neither side has got the answer quite right.
If you've ever signed up for a credit card， you've most likely skipped through the boilerplate contracts at the center of the controversy.They're mostly concerned with commercial terms such as interest rates and fees.These standardized conditions facilitate trade and save everyone time and money.
Increasingly， though， the agreements include something else： a clause requiring consumers to resolve disputes in private arbitration， not in court.In some markets， the practice has become so universal that customers no longer have any choice.This is troubling， because arbitrations have no juries， no rules of evidence and no straightforward method of appeal to the courts.They've also been known to go badly wrong.
Enter the CFPB， which issued a rule earlier this month saying that financial companies can't ask consumers to sign contracts waiving their right to participate in class actions.On the face of it， this makes sense， given that such actions - which bundle numerous complaints in a single lawsuit - can be the only way for plaintiffs with limited resources to gain compensation.It would also bring the U.S.more in line with the U.K.and other European countries， where mandatory arbitration clauses are typically considered invalid.
Problem is， the CFPB's solution assumes that U.S.class-action law works well， which it doesn't.Unlike most other developed countries， the U.S.lets courts award large punitive damages， doesn't require unsuccessful plaintiffs to pay defendants' costs， and allows classes to include customers who haven't actively agreed to participate - all of which leads to too much expensive litigation.Lawyers can end up gaining more than aggrieved customers， incurring costs that can get passed on to consumers as higher prices.
What to do? Simply repealing the CFPB rule and leaving the current system in place， as Republican legislators propose， wouldn't be an improvement.The right answer starts with tort reform.Congress should make it harder to form classes on an opt-out basis， put limits on damages and lawyers' fees， and let courts tell the losing side to pay the opponent's legal costs.
Once that's done， the CFPB's rule would work well， because there'd be no good reason to force consumers away from the courts.Firms and their customers could choose the appropriate venue - be it the courts， arbitration or mediation - case by case.But the CFPB can't get to this outcome by itself.The larger problem is one that only Congress can solve.
The credit card contract is mentioned mainly to______.
Aillustrate the ambiguity and uncertainty in contract language
Bremind companies to protect themselves from customer lawsuits
Ccaution customers against the hidden traps in commercial contracts
Dreveal the power imbalance between financial companies and customers
参考答案：D
[单选题]
The decision by Sunderland University to close history， modern languages and politics degrees in favour of more “career-focused” courses has been widely criticised.One objection is simply that all these humanities subjects offer students skills that play well in the job market.But it’s a problem to reduce university education to simply what sells to employers.These are subjects that matter to society as a whole，whether in working out the political implications of the climate crisis or understanding the fate of post-industrial towns.They shouldn’t become the preserve of an elite.
Course closures such as these are a predictable consequence of the government’s decision to remove the quotas on student recruitment from 2015.Prior to that point， there were centrally imposed limits on how many students any given university could recruit.Since then， it’s been a free-for-all.Subjects such as history and politics， which don’t require expensive infrastructure to teach，were popular targets for expanding student intake in the more selective universities.That was good news for students who’d previously had to settle for their second-choice institution， but it’s making it hard to sustain a full range of courses at the middle- and lower-tariff universities， as a proportion of their applicants head for more “prestigious” institutions and their student numbers decline.
While more applicants now get into their first choice of university， not every applicant is equally mobile.The students who lose most as courses close are those who need to fit study around the school run， or other caring responsibilities， and therefore rely on local provision.Then there are the applicants who prefer a university with experience of dealing with people who are the first in their family to go into higher education，or who arrive with BTecs (specialist work-related qualifications)rather than A-levels(subject-based qualifications).
The free market makes for losers.Academic staff at one popular institution said that they’re expected to support 50 personal tutees each， making it almost impossible to get to know students individually.University staff are bearing the brunt of the volatility， whether navigating those enormous tutorial groups at one end of the scale， facing redundancy at the other， or stuck in the middle on a fixed-term contract that may or may not be renewed depending on student numbers.But the implications of this shake-up to the sector go wider.The number of university students has fallen dramatically， with inevitable knock-on effects for local economy.
This is not a political climate that favours easy decisions in higher education.Concerns about the impact of Brexit and reliance on overseas fee income have been widespread.But these must not be the terms of the debate.A society—and indeed a world—confronting the climate crisis urgently needs people who have the education to think about big issues.Those aren’t only scientific or technological.The humanities matter.And it matters that students from all backgrounds—and across the country—have the opportunity to join in these world-changing discussions.
We can learn from Paragraph 1 that______.
Ahumanities majors are uncompetitive in the job market.
Bhumanities subjects are essential for solving social issues.
C“career-focused” courses have become the preserve of an elite.
D“career-focused” education don’t open the doors to rewarding careers.
参考答案：B
☛☛☛试题来源于华课网校焚题库，进入2022年研究生考试练习题库>>>更多考研试题(每日一练、模拟试卷、历年真题、易错题)等你来做!
扫码进入考研交流群
☟☟☟
责编：hym
相关文章
报考指南
- 考研真题
- 模拟试题
- 考研备考