When ‘Just’ is Just Not Enough - Why Consumers Do Not Appreciate Non-Neutral Internet Access Services

Although Internet service providers (ISPs) are technically capable as well as legally allowed to offer non-neutral Internet access services, where the data flows of customers who pay a premium are prioritized over others, such an access service is currently not offered by ISPs. We argue that ISPs are hesitant to tap the price discrimination potential of prioritized Internet access services, because in the context of the ongoing public debate on net neutrality (NN), their customers would consider such differentiation unjust. In a representative survey among German Internet access customers, we find that the customers’ perceptions of justice as well as the framing of the mechanism by which prioritized Internet access is provided are indeed decisive for whether customers would prefer this access regime over NN. In particular, we find that perceptions of distributive and procedural justice influence customers’ choice for non-neutral Internet access. Moreover, customers are more likely to accept a regime that offers an absolute rather than a relative prioritization of data flow

Credibility of Health Information and Digital Media: New Perspectives and Implications for Youth

Part of the Volume on Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility. This chapter considers the role of Web technologies on the availability and consumption of health information. It argues that young people are largely unfamiliar with trusted health sources online, making credibility particularly germane when considering this type of information. The author suggests that networked digital media allow for humans and technologies act as "apomediaries" that can be used to steer consumers to high quality health information, thereby empowering health information seekers of all ages

Platforms, Power, and the Antitrust Challenge: A Modest Proposal to Narrow the U.S.-Europe Divide

Big platforms dominate the new economy landscape. Colloquially known as GAFA [Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple] or FAANG [Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google], the high tech big data companies are charged with using the power of their platforms to squelch start-ups, appropriate rivals’ ideas, and take and commercialize the personal data of their users. Are the platforms violating the antitrust laws? Should they be broken up? Or are they the agents of progress in the new economy? On these points, the United States antitrust law and the European Union competition law may diverge. The Competition Directorate-General of the European Commission has brought proceedings against or is investigating Google, Amazon, Apple, and Facebook. Germany, under its own competition law, has condemned Facebook’s conduct. Meanwhile, in the United States, authorities are skeptical, but they have commenced investigations. This Article is a comparative analysis of U.S. and EU law regarding monopolization/abuse of dominance as background to understanding why EU law is aggressive and U.S. law may be meek in the treatment of the big tech platforms. First, it examines the factors that underlie the two perspectives. Second, it considers three cases or problems—Google/Comparative Shopping (EU), Facebook-Personal Data (Germany), and dominant platforms’ acquisitions of start-ups that are inchoate competitive threats, such as Facebook’s acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram. The Article considers what lessons the latest Supreme Court antitrust decision, Ohio v. American Express (AmEx), holds for the analysis of the big data antitrust issues. Third, it asks what U.S. antitrust law and enforcement should do. It concludes that U.S. antitrust law should reclaim its role as watchdog to stop abuses of economic power, and makes suggestions for U.S. antitrust law to meet the big-platform challenge in a modest but meaningful and practicable way. I. Introduction II. A Brief Comparison of U.S. and EU Law of Monopolization/Abuse of Dominance ... A. The United States ... B. Europe ... C. Presumptions and Divergences III. Implications for High Tech, Big Data IV. Three Examples of Alleged Platform Abuse ... A. Google/Comparative Shopping ... 1. EU Law ... 2. U.S. Law ... B. Facebook—Abuse of Data ... 1. German Law ... 2. U.S. Law ... C. Start-Ups: Nipping Competition in the Bud V. Proposals VI. Conclusio

Analysis and optimization of distribution logistics for Just Water Company

This report details the various factors that affect the operational efficiency of distribution logistics. The research aimed at studying the existing components involved in the distribution logistics of Just Water. Distribution logistics begins at the end of the production line where the finished product is emerged until it reaches the customers. The literature review explains the key components of distribution logistics in an organisation. This research analyses the existing components of the distribution logistics of Just Water and discusses possible improvements that can be adapted to increase the overall efficiency of the distribution logistics operation. The background of the research is that Just Water faces difficulty with delivering its products on time during peak seasons. The research tries to unveil the reason for this delay and finds that the demands for extra water-out deliveries are interfering with the normal runs of the trucks, therein delaying their regular schedule. One another cause was found to be the shortage of supplies due to slow or less return logistics. The research suggests a change in the existing drop shipping distribution model and recommends the adaptation of intermediary or multi-stage distribution networks, possibly the ‘Last Mile Delivery’ configuration in order to reduce delivery lead-time, reduce transportation costs and improve customer satisfaction

Expanding the education role to narrow the audit expectation gap: exploring the expectation gap’s existence among accounting students

Society perceives and expects more from auditor’s than what auditors can actually achieve. Society has been found to misperceive the role of an auditor, in particular, in regards to fraud, internal controls and going concern issues. Society’s differing perceptions and expectations of the auditing profession is known as the audit expectation gap. This study aims to explore the audit expectation gap’s existence among Wintec accounting students and the effect that education has on the audit expectation gap. This research intends to answer two research questions. First, does an audit expectation gap exist among Wintec accounting students? Second, what is the effect of education on the audit expectation gap? To answer these research questions, 20 Wintec accounting students have been interviewed. Ten students who have received an audit education, and ten students who have not received audit education. Qualitative data was collected from these interviews and analysed using a mixed methods approach. This study found that an audit education exists among Wintec accounting students. This study also found that education reduced the audit expectation gap, in particular, the deficient performance gap and the communication gap. However, while education did reduce the audit expectations gap, it was not eliminated. This study recommends that Wintec provides a more basic auditing education during introductory accounting papers, educating students on the role of an auditor. This study also recommends that education focuses on the practical use of an audit report, to increase student’s understandings of the information in the audit report, and how this information is communicated. Thus, the researcher believes that these recommendations will help to further reduce the audit expectation

Research in multi-cultural relationship building

This study aims to explore the ‘missing gap' between the values of an Accounting firm and the preference shown by Maaori on how they would like to be approached when wanting to build a trusted relationship within a business sense. This study makes use of qualitative approaches in which data is collected primarily through interviews and analysed to produce results and recommendations. The study found that Maaori would like to be approached in a way that makes sense to them and also identifies with their cultural proceedings. It also provides insight into how important trust is when establishing a relationship with Maaori. The study recommends that further studies conducted should interview a wider variety of focus groups to add different elements to this research and that FIRM A's small business department's offerings do not align with what Maaori want so need to be rethought to adapt to Maaor expectations

Unwarranted Fears Mask the Benefits of Network Diversity: An Argument against Mandating Network Neutrality

The rapid development of the Internet has necessitated an update to Federal telecommunications laws. Recent Congressional efforts to enact such an update, however, have spawned a fiery debate over a somewhat nebulous concept: network neutrality. The debate concerns the way that Internet access providers handle the data traffic being sent over their networks. These providers would like the option to offer some of their customers, web site hosting companies and similar entities, additional services that would essentially result in these customers’ content loading faster, more reliably, or more securely than others not receiving such priority treatment. Yet, this proposed “diversity” of content treatment has worried many who fear that the egalitarian nature of the Internet, under which substantial innovation has occurred, would be disturbed by the imposition of inherent traffic preferences. These individuals propose including a provision in new telecommunications legislation that would mandate a “neutral” Internet where preferences for data are prohibited from being implemented. In this Comment, Elvis Stumbergs sheds some light on details behind the network neutrality debate. Often glossed-over details of Internet architecture are described to illustrate the consequences of a diverse and neutral Internet, and the various arguments for and against network neutrality are summarized. Stumbergs then devotes the Comment primarily to examining present and potential competition in the provision of Internet access, along with regulatory, antitrust, and legislative options available to ensure the preservation of a vigorous Internet access marketplace. Stumbergs concludes that network neutrality proponents’ fears are largely unwarranted. Moreover, imposing network neutrality legislation could ironically hinder the innovation that network neutrality advocates seemingly seek to protect